D2.9 Mapping of relevant stakeholders describing ...€¦ · Mapping of relevant stakeholders...

D2.9 Mapping of relevant stakeholders

describing activities, positions, and good

practices including recommendations for

synergies

Project Danube-INCO.NET

Project Number 609497

Deliverable Number: D2.9

Submission Date 15.08.2016.

Responsible author(s): Virag ZSAR, Zsuzsanna ANGYAL, Anna BOGNAR, Andras

CSONDOR, Mate BABJAK, Nora JENEY, Bela KARDON (RCISD)

Mapping of relevant stakeholders describing activities, positions, and good practices including recommendations for synergies (D2.9) Danube-INCO.NET

2

Document Control Sheet

Work package Number WP2

Work package Title Policy Dialogue

Task Number T2.2

Task Title Policy Framework Coordination

Deliverable Number D2.9

Deliverable Title Mapping of relevant stakeholders describing activities, positions, and

good practices including recommendations for synergies

File Name Deliverable2_9_updated

Number of pages 99

Dissemination level Public

Main author Virag ZSAR (RCISD)

Contributors Zsuzsanna ANGYAL, Anna BOGNAR, Mate BABJAK, Andras CSONDOR,

Elke DALL, Martina HARTL, Nora JENEY, Bela KARDON, Davor KOZMUS

Quality Assurance Lena Tsipouri

Versioning and Contribution History

Version Date Author/Editor Contributors Description/Comments

_v01 15.11.2014

Virag Zsar Nora Jeney,

Zsuzsanna Angyal,

Anna Bognar, Mate

Babjak, Bela

Kardon

_v02 09.12.2014 Elke Dall,

Martina Hartl

Feedback

_v03 13.01.2015

Virag Zsar Nora Jeney, Anna

Bognar, Bela

Kardon

Revised version based on

feedbacks collected

_v04 24.01.2015 Lena Tsipouri QA

_05 24.02.2015 Virag Zsar Nora Jeney Revised version based on

feedbacks collected

_v06 10.03.2015 Lena Tsipouri QA

_07 15.04.2015 Virag Zsar Nora Jeney Revised version


3

_08 25.04.2015 Lena Tsipouri QA

_Final 28.04.2015. Virag Zsar final version

_updated 15.08.2016 Virag Zsar,

Andras Csondor

updated and extended

version

_Final 29.09.2016 Lena Tsipouri QA

Document last saved on 05.10.2016


4

Content Content .................................................................................................................................................... 4

List of Tables ........................................................................................................................................ 8

List of Figures & Pictures ..................................................................................................................... 8

List of Abbreviations ............................................................................................................................ 9

1 Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................... 11

2 Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 14

2.1 Objectives and the structure of the report .............................................................................. 14

2.2 Methodology ............................................................................................................................ 15

2.3 Definitions ................................................................................................................................ 22

2.4 Limitations ................................................................................................................................ 23

3 Introducing stakeholders, related programmes and activities with a special focus on their

relevance to R&I activities within Danube Region ................................................................................ 24

3.1 Stakeholders based in the Danube Region............................................................................... 24

3.1.1 Networks.......................................................................................................................... 24

Danube Rectors’ Conference (DRC) ............................................................................. 24

Danube Universities (DU) ............................................................................................. 25

Council of Danube Cities and Regions (CoDCR) ........................................................... 26

Urban Platform Danube Region (UPDR)....................................................................... 27

Danube Alliance ............................................................................................................ 27

Danubiz ......................................................................................................................... 28

European Commission Joint Research Centre (JRC): Danube Innovation Partnerships, Scientific Support for the EUSDR .................................................................................. 28

Danube Strategy Research Network (DSRN) ................................................................ 30

Danube Cluster Network (DanuClus) ........................................................................... 30

Young Citizens Danube Network (YCDN) ..................................................................... 30

Danube Civil Society Forum (DCSF) .............................................................................. 31

European Danube Academy ......................................................................................... 31

3.1.2 Associations with the status of international organization ............................................. 31

International Association for Danube Research (IAD) ................................................. 31

International Commission for the Protection of the Danube River (ICPDR) ................ 32

3.1.3 Associations/NGOs .......................................................................................................... 32

Danube Chambers of Commerce Association (DCCA) ................................................. 32

3.1.4 Other types of initiatives/stakeholders ........................................................................... 32

Ulm Follow-up Group ................................................................................................... 32


5

European Commission Joint Research Centre (JRC): Danube Innovation Partnerships, Scientific Support for the EUSDR .................................................................................. 33

Steinbeis Danube Center .............................................................................................. 34

Viadonau ...................................................................................................................... 35

Danube Area Interregional Group at the Committee of the Regions .......................... 35

3.2 Regional and/or transnational stakeholders ............................................................................ 36

3.2.1 Networks.......................................................................................................................... 36

The Regional Network for Central and South Eastern Europe of ICA (CASEE) ............ 36

3.2.2 Committees, councils with the status of international organization .............................. 36

Black Sea Economic Cooperation (BSEC) ..................................................................... 36

Regional Cooperation Council (RCC) ............................................................................ 37

Southeast European Cooperative Initiative (SECI) ....................................................... 38

3.2.3 Organizations with an intergovernmental feature .......................................................... 38

Central European Initiative (CEI) .................................................................................. 38

Salzburg Forum ............................................................................................................. 40

Visegrad 4 Cooperation (V4) ........................................................................................ 41

3.2.4 Agencies, funds at transnational level ............................................................................. 42

Visegrad Fund ............................................................................................................... 42

Central European Exchange Programme for University Studies (CEEPUS) .................. 42

Western Balkans Research and Innovation Strategy Exercise (WISE) Centre ............. 43

Western Balkans Enterprise Development and Innovation Facility (WB EDIF) ........... 44

3.2.5 Other types of initiatives/stakeholders ........................................................................... 44

Southeast Europe Investment Committee (SEEIC) ...................................................... 44

Vienna Economic Forum (VEF) ..................................................................................... 45

Central European Service for Cross-border Initiatives (CESCI) .................................... 45

Institute for the Danube Region and Central Europe (IDM) ........................................ 46

3.3 European Union ........................................................................................................................ 46

3.3.1 European Transnational Cooperation Programmes (ETCs) ............................................. 46

Central Europe (CE) Transnational Cooperation Programme ...................................... 46

Southeast Europe (SEE) Transnational Cooperation Programme ................................ 47

Danube Transnational Cooperation Programme (Danube TP) .................................... 48

3.3.2 Joint Programming Initiatives (JPIs) ................................................................................. 49

Joint Programming Initiative Water challenges for a changing world (Water JPI) ...... 49

3.3.3 Knowledge Innovation Communities (KICs) .................................................................... 50

KIC InnoEnergy ............................................................................................................. 50

Climate-KIC ................................................................................................................... 51


6

3.3.4 Networks at EU level ....................................................................................................... 52

EUREKA ......................................................................................................................... 52

European Cluster Alliance (ECA)................................................................................... 52

European University Association (EUA) ....................................................................... 53

Enterprise Europe Network (EEN) ................................................................................ 53

3.4 Stakeholders at international level .......................................................................................... 54

3.4.1 International Organizations and Agencies....................................................................... 54

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) ............. 54

OECD Regional Programme for Southeast Europe ...................................................... 55

3.4.2 Associations and other initiatives .................................................................................... 56

Association of the European Chambers of Commerce and Industry (Eurochambers) 56

Association of Regional Development Agencies (EURADA) ......................................... 56

Academic Cooperation Association (ACA) ................................................................... 56

4 Evaluation on the results of the initiatives identified from the point of view of R&I policy dialogue

57

4.1.1 Targeted Field .................................................................................................................. 57

4.1.2 Scientific areas targeted .................................................................................................. 58

4.2 Funding ..................................................................................................................................... 59

4.2.1 Funding Source of the Initiative ...................................................................................... 59

4.2.2 Type of Activities funded ................................................................................................. 59

4.3 Cooperation along the Triple Helix .......................................................................................... 60

4.4 Cooperation among stakeholders ............................................................................................ 61

4.5 Self-Evaluation of the Initiatives .............................................................................................. 64

4.6 Impact Assessment of Targeted Initiatives .............................................................................. 65

4.6.1 Visibility............................................................................................................................ 65

4.6.2 Impact/results .................................................................................................................. 66

5 Outcomes of Stakeholders’ Workshops ........................................................................................ 68

5.1 Good practices & Identified Necessities .................................................................................. 69

Continuous dialogue with national and EU stakeholders ............................................ 69

Technology and knowledge transfer: involvement of SMEs ........................................ 69

Dialogue within the Triple Helix ................................................................................... 70

Implementation and impact oriented programming ................................................... 70

Importance of co-funding and facilitating the access to EU funds .............................. 70

Dialogue among regional stakeholders ........................................................................ 71

5.2 Key messages & lessons learnt from the view of the EUSDR ................................................... 71

Need for improved cooperation among PAs ............................................................... 71


7

More information and visibility .................................................................................... 71

From Triple Helix to Quadruple Helix ........................................................................... 71

6 Conclusions .................................................................................................................................... 73

6.1 Policy dialogue and priority setting .......................................................................................... 73

6.2 Main features of activities or programmes carried out by stakeholders................................. 73

6.3 Initiatives targeting Cross-sectoral Dialogue ............................................................................ 74

7 Policy Recommendations on exploiting synergies and transferring good practices..................... 75

7.1 Reinforced Policy Dialogue among Stakeholders to Exploit Synergies and Achieve Mutual Goals

75

7.2 Enhanced Involvement in the Implementation of EUSDR ....................................................... 76

7.3 Expanding Joint Programmes to Connect and Exploit the Potentials of the Region ............... 77

7.4 Support the RI community ....................................................................................................... 77

7.5 Strengthened dialogue among the academia – industry – government and the civil sphere . 78

8 Dissemination Roadmap................................................................................................................ 80

8.1 Target group ............................................................................................................................. 80

8.2 Dissemination methods, tools and channels ........................................................................... 80

8.2.1 Presentation at conferences, workshops, back-to-back events ...................................... 80

8.2.2 Cross project dissemination ............................................................................................ 82

8.2.3 Direct mailing ................................................................................................................... 82

8.2.4 Newsletter ....................................................................................................................... 82

8.2.5 Online appearance on websites ...................................................................................... 83

8.2.6 Social media appearance ................................................................................................. 83

9 Bibliography ................................................................................................................................... 84

10 Annex I – List of Stakeholders .................................................................................................. 86

11 Annex II – List of Questions for the Investigation .................................................................... 92

11.1 First round of the investigation............................................................................................ 92

11.2 Second round of the investigation – interview guide .......................................................... 93

12 Annex III – List of Interviews .................................................................................................... 95

13 Annex IV: Lists of participants .................................................................................................. 96

13.1 1st Stakeholders’ Workshop ................................................................................................. 96

13.1.1 Agenda......................................................................................................................... 96

Venue ................................................................................................................................................ 97

13.1.2 List of participants ....................................................................................................... 97

13.2 2nd Stakeholders’ Workshop ................................................................................................ 99

13.2.1 List of panellists ........................................................................................................... 99


8

List of Tables

Table 1: Alignment criteria of presented stakeholders ......................................................................... 24

Table 2: Thematic flagship clusters launched by JRC ............................................................................ 29

Table 3: Thematic flagship clusters launched by JRC ............................................................................ 34

Table 4: Self-evaluation of interviewed stakeholders ........................................................................... 64

List of Figures & Pictures

Figure 1: Type of Selected Stakeholders ............................................................................................... 21

Figure 2: Geographical Scope of the Initiatives ..................................................................................... 22

Figure 3: Members of Danube Universities (edited by RCISD) .............................................................. 26

Figure 4: Member cities of CoDCR (source: www.danubecities.eu) ..................................................... 27

Figure 5: Countries covered by CEEPUS and the Visegrad Fund (edited by RCISD) .............................. 42

Figure 6: Territorial coverage of Central Europe ETC (source: central2013.eu) ................................... 47

Figure 7: Territorial coverage by SEE ETC and one of its successors, the Danube Transnational

Cooperation Programme (Danube ETC) (edited by RCISD) ................................................................... 48

Figure 8: Partners and observer countries of Water JPI (source: www.waterjpi.eu) ........................... 50

Figure 9: Kic InnoEnergy activities throughout Europe (source: www.kic-innoenergy.com) ............... 51

Figure 10: Number of stakeholders targeting research, innovation and education ............................. 57

Figure 11: Scientific areas targeted by stakeholders ............................................................................ 58

Figure 12: Funding source of initiatives ................................................................................................ 59

Figure 13: Type of activities funded by selected stakeholders (if any) ................................................. 60

Figure 14: Cooperation along the Triple Helix ....................................................................................... 61

Figure 15: Main Targeted Sectors of the Initiatives .............................................................................. 61

Figure 16: Cooperation web of selected stakeholders .......................................................................... 63

Picture 1: Participants of the 1st Stakeholders’ Workshop held in Budapest on 8 June 2015 ............. 68

Picture 2: Panellists of the 2nd Stakeholders’ Workshop held in Ulm, on 30 October 2015................ 69

Figure 17: Broadening the support of RI relevant actions of EUSDR might be backed by the approach

of the quadruple helix ........................................................................................................................... 79


9

List of Abbreviations

ACA Academic Cooperation Association BACSEE Business Advisory Council for Southeast Europe and Eurasia BICs Business Innovation Centres BMBF German Federal Ministry of Education and Research BSEC Black Sea Economic Cooperation BSTDB Black Sea Trade and Development Bank CASEE ICA Regional Network for Central and South Eastern Europe CBC Cross-Border Cooperation CBM Cluster in Biomedicine CE Central Europe CEE Central Eastern Europe CEEPUS Central European Exchange Program for University Studies CEFTA Central European Free Trade Agreement CEI Central European Initiative CEI UniNet Central European Initiative University Network CESCI Central European Service for Cross-border Initiatives CoDCR Council of Danube Cities and Regions COST European Cooperation in Science and Technology Danube-INCO.NET Danube Region INCO-NET DanuClus Danube Cluster Network DCCA Danube Chambers of Commerce Association DCSF Danube Civil Society Forum DoW Description of Work DR Danube Region DRC Danube Rectors' Conference DREAM Danube River REsearch And Management DRIFF Danube Region Research and Innovation Fund DTC Danube Transfer Center DU Danube Universities EBRD European Bank for Reconstruction and Development EC European Commission ECA European Cluster Alliance EGTC European Grouping for Territorial Cooperation EIT European Institute of Technology and Innovation ENP European Neighbourhood Policy ETC European Territorial Cooperation ETF Exchange-Traded Fund Exchange-Traded Fund Eurochambers Association of the European Chambers of Commerce and Industry EU13 group of Member States of the European Union gained accession since 2004 EUA European University Association EURADA European Association of Development Agencies EUSDR EU Strategy for the Danube Region EUSDR PACs EU Strategy for the Danube Region Priority Area Coordinators FP7 Seventh Framework Programme HDF Hellenic Development Fund H2020 Horizon2020 JPI Joint Programming Initiative JRC Joint Research Centre ICTP International Centre for Theoretical Physics ABDUS SALAM


10

IAD International Association for Danube Research ICBSS International Centre for Black Sea Studies ICGEB International Centre for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology ICPDR International Commission for the Protection of the Danube River ICT Information and Communications Technology IDM Institute for the Danube and Central Europe JPI Joint Programming Initiative JRC Joint Research Centre KICs Knowledge Innovation Communities NGO non-governmental organization OECD Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development PA Priority Area PABSEC Parliamentary Assembly of the Black Sea Economic Cooperation PhD Doctor of Philosophy PIDIN Partnership for Improvement of Danube Infrastructure and Navigation R&D research and development RCC Regional Cooperation Council RCISD Regional Centre for Information and Scientific Development RI research and innovation SECI Southeast European Cooperative Initiative SEE Southeast Europe SEECEL South East European Centre for Entrepreneurial Learning SEECP South-East European Cooperation Process SEEIC Southeast Europe Investment Committee SISSA International School for Advanced Studies SG Steering Group SME Small and medium-sized enterprise SP Steering Platform TEN-T Networks Trans-European Transport Networks UN ECE United Nations Economic Commission for Europe UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization UPDR Urban Platform Danube Region V4 Visegrad 4 Cooperation, Visegrad Group WB EDIF Western Balkans Enterprise Development and Innovation Facility WBCs Western Balkan Countries VEF Vienna Economic Forum WFD Water Framework Directive WISE Western Balkans Research and Innovation Strategy Exercise WP Work Package YCDN Young Citizens Danube Network


11

1 Executive Summary The project Danube.INCO-NET aims, among others, to support RI policy dialogue mainly in the EU

Strategy for the Danube Region (EUSDR) Priority Area Steering Groups and to exchange information

on existing stakeholders in the field of RI in the Region. In line with this, the main goal of the report

“Mapping of relevant stakeholders describing activities, positions, and good practices including

recommendations for synergies” is, through the analysis of RI related stakeholders, programmes and

initiatives, to identify possible synergies and transferable good practices. The results of this analytical

work shall support the better exploitation of existing initiatives and programmes, an enhanced

dialogue among stakeholders, as well as more targeted actions in the field of RI and education to

support the implementation of the related actions of EUSDR.

The present report examined 49 stakeholders (including initiatives and programmes) among others:

networks (e.g. DRC, CASEE), associations (e.g. EURADA), organizations of an intergovernmental nature

(e.g. CEI), international organizations (e.g. BSEC, Visegrad Group), EU programmes and initiatives (e.g.

SEE, Danube TP) as well as other relevant international organizations (e.g. UNESCO, OECD,

Eurochambers). These stakeholders were considered of utmost importance mainly from the view of

research, innovation and the relevant fields of education (i.e. higher education) or from the view of

experience in regional cooperation among the almost hundred actors present in the Danube Region.

Data gathering was conducted through desk research, questionnaires and (online, telephone or

personal) interviews. The aim was to devote special attention to the outcomes of their recent activities,

good practices to be transferred to other programmes or initiatives, and their future priorities in order

to define synergies and formulate policy recommendations.

The findings of the investigation on stakeholders can be summarized through the following points:

Policy dialogue and priority setting

1) A few initiatives have already proved to be successful in influencing decision-making at

national or EU-level (EURADA, VEF).

2) Several initiatives have already made important efforts to be more involved in the

implementation of the EUSDR Strategy (CoDCR, DanuClus, Ulm Follow-up Group, DRC).

3) Many stakeholders, e.g. CEI, SEEIC, Eurochambers, have already harmonized their action plans

or strategies with the Europe 2020 Strategy. In many cases, this stands for the Danube Strategy

as well.

4) Stakeholders under investigation are aware of potential synergies but there is no proof for

joint actions neither in priority setting nor in defining the scope and target of programmes.

5) The main obstacle to cooperation, beside the lack of funds, is the heterogeneity of the Region

in terms of social, political and economic factors. The lack of funds is an issue in several cases,

however, there are a number of funds available, however, potential beneficiaries cannot

always apply for them due to various (legal, institutional or financial) factors.

6) Only half of stakeholders at EU or international levels (EUA, OECD, UNESCO, JRC, EEN) covering

through their members the whole Danube Region reflect the priorities of the EUSDR in their

strategies or action plans and support their members/target groups to take part in the

implementation of the Strategy.


12

Main features of activities or programmes carried out by stakeholders

1) Half of stakeholders under investigation provide funding for programmes covering different

types of activities such as research and development, innovation, mobility, career

development, networking and joint use of R&D facilities/laboratories. It cannot be stated that

there are unnecessary overlaps among these programmes, however, regarding their scope,

target audience and publication of calls, coordination is ostensibly missing.

2) Few stakeholders (DRC, EUREKA, Ulm Follow-up Group) launched new funds available for

researchers and innovators in the Region to support the implementation of the EUSDR.

3) There is a strong will to support & promote businesses (e.g. DCCA, Danubiz, Ulm Follow-up

Group), especially SMEs (through providing training, advice or creating an adequate

environment for them) in most of the initiatives. Grants targeting the industry, with a special

regard to SMEs are not yet entirely tailor-made for their needs: long-term planning would be

needed to ensure that industrial partners are able to secure their financial sources.

4) Networking is of utmost importance from the policy level through the research community to

the civil sphere. There is an important number of initiatives providing platform and/or funding

for networking events, however, there is need for multiplying them and providing opportunity

for stakeholders to take part at more events.

5) All stakeholders in the Region aims at deepening regional cooperation: the impact of a few of

them is proven by external evaluation, e.g. CEEPUS facilitated that less teachers leave the

Danube Region.

6) Some stakeholders (e.g. CoDCR, Visegrad Fund, UPDR, DCSF) put special focus on the

involvement of citizens through awareness raising campaigns, programmes dedicating

dissemination, etc. Now programmes at transnational (Central Europe and Danube

Transnational Programmes) and EU levels put more emphasis on the involvement of the civil

sphere to various projects due to their role as end-users with regard to various RDI projects.

7) Future priorities seem to converge to: (a) generating joint projects in the region – including in

the frame of H2020, transnational programmes and smaller scale cooperation programmes,

educational cooperation, etc.; (b) capacity building; (c) promoting SMEs, business

development and entrepreneurship; (d) focusing on intercultural society, cultural heritage,

culture; (e) facilitating tourism, trade and investment.

Initiatives targeting Cross-sectoral Dialogue

1) An important majority (71%) of stakeholders under investigation targets innovation as one of

their main activities, whereas research and education are almost of equal importance:

representing targeted fields of 50-60% of the initiatives. One third of the initiatives focus on

all the three fields (16 – 33 %), meaning that triple helix cooperation does exist in the Region

even though there is room for improvement.

2) Knowledge and technology transfer is supported by several stakeholders (e.g. Steinbeis, OECD,

CEI, KICs, JRC), however, huge gaps have to be overcome within the Region in this field: only a

third of stakeholders under investigation (e.g. Steinbeis Danube Center, JRC, DCCA, CEI, KICs)

is devoted to the enhancement of cooperation in the triple helix.

3) Cooperation along the quadruple helix axes can be hardly tracked down in the Region, even

though the civil sphere represents the end-user side of research, innovation and education

actions.


13

The outcomes of the analysis gave evidence that following the identification of synergies and best

practices there is a significant need in defining recommendations for their enhanced exploitation and

possible harmonization of programmes, priorities, and other supporting initiatives. Therefore

proposals were made relating to the following issues:

1) Reinforced policy dialogue among regional stakeholders to exploit synergies and achieve

mutual goals. It is recommended to harmonize priorities, action plans and strategies of

stakeholders; to enhance the visibility of initiatives and opportunities available for the RI

community, find complementarities to achieve more than through individual efforts; to exploit

different funding opportunities to increase the volume and impact of these programmes; to

conduct continuous dialogue with and between various Priority Area Steering Groups.

2) Enhanced involvement of stakeholders under investigation in the implementation of EUSDR.

It is advised to tighten linkages among regional stakeholders and EU actors; to strengthen the

implementation of EUSDR activities, if needed, by securing the necessary financial resources.

3) Extending joint programmes to connect and exploit their potentials of the Region.

Stakeholders are encouraged to secure resources or dedicated funds for projects initiated by

beneficiaries from the Region either through dedicated call, as it was launched by EUREKA, or

separate fund, as it was initiated by DRC; to foster the possibility of running joint programmes

through enlarging the scope of the original ones; to broaden well-functioning programmes to

other forms of cooperation such as joint use of research infrastructure, knowledge sharing,

knowledge and know-how transfer; to initiate programmes resulting in tangible outcomes,

such as development of research infrastructure, specific research centres in line with S3, etc.

4) Practical support to the RI community. Researchers and innovators in the Region would need

more structured information on various programmes available and their administrative

burdens shall be decreased. Thus it is recommended to further promote and support

opportunities for networking; to spread information on calls, programmes, events, etc. in

targeted and well-structured way; to exploit the existing funds in the Danube Region; to take

into consideration the need of the industry through long-term programmes which allow

private companies to plan their engagement and allocate the related financial resources in

advance; to further contribute to deepening regional cooperation at national level, policy

makers are invited to encourage the national RI community to be more involved in the


5) Strengthened dialogue among the academia – industry – government and the civil sphere.

Stakeholders are invited to develop joint research – innovation – education programmes to

ensure the dialogue and the exchange of know-how among the various sectors; to explain the

mutual gains and benefits of the triple helix cooperation to the representatives of all three

fields; if necessary, to consider the involvement of the civil sphere in certain actions in line

with the approach of quadruple helix.

To ensure that the report is disseminated in a highly efficient way, a dissemination roadmap was

elaborated. The dissemination of the results will be a multiple-level activity including the organization

of back-to-back events to present the findings and improve the study, cross project dissemination,

circulation through direct mailing and newsletter, online appearance on websites, as well as social

media appearance.


14

2 Introduction Danube-INCO.NET is an FP7 funded coordination and support action for the official EU Strategy for the

Danube Region (EUSDR) in the field of research and innovation (RI). Whereas the EUSDR addresses a

wide variety of Priority Areas (PAs) (ranging from PA 1A „Mobility/Waterways” to PA 11 „Security“),

Danube-INCO.NET focuses mainly on two of them: PA 7 „Knowledge Society” and PA 8

„Competitiveness“. The project supports the policy dialogue, creates networks, elaborates analyses

and recommendations, and foster R&I activities in the Region.

Regarding the support of policy dialogue in the field of RI, through Work Package 2 “Policy

Coordination” the project is directly involved in high level meetings as well as the meetings of PA7 and

PA8 aiming to facilitate the exchange of information and an enhanced policy dialogue. This activity is

accomplished by various means such as the cross-fertilization of the various priority areas, the support

for the implementation of the Innovation Union and European Research Area in enlargement and ENP

countries, but also, under Task 2.2 “Policy Framework Coordination” the mapping of relevant

stakeholders in the Danube Region (DR) to find complementarities, identify transferable good practices

and formulate policy recommendations.

Several stakeholders relevant for research, innovation and the respective part of education (mainly

higher education) exist in the Danube Region: one part of them started operating much before the

adoption of the EU Strategy for the Danube Region whereas the other part of them rooted in the

Strategy and started the operation afterwards. Both can be relevant from the point of view of the RI,

as well as education related priorities of the Strategy, which are covered mainly by the Priority Area 7

for Knowledge Society, PA 8 for Competitiveness and PA9 for People & Skills.

These stakeholders do vary in other terms, such as their organizational status, character, target groups,

targeted topics, etc. Nevertheless, the majority of regional, transnational and international

organizations/initiatives focusing on the Danube Region seek the reinforcement of cooperation and/or

some kind of dialogue in the targeted fields. However, dialogue among these stakeholders cannot be

considered well-established even if their targeted fields or groups are identical.

2.1 Objectives and the structure of the report

Therefore it has been deemed necessary to map existing stakeholders, including initiatives,

international or regional organizations, networks, programmes, fora, etc. in the Danube Region and to

identify their main objectives and future priorities. This analytical exercise shall enable us to grip

synergies or overlaps, unnecessary duplications among the existing programmes, priorities and

activities and define recommendations on their better and more targeted use.

To do so, first, the report will provide a compact overview on stakeholders under investigation. Their

general objectives, future priorities will be presented, as well as the main outcomes of the recent years,

including possibly transferable practices. Second, the assessment of these aspects will be given

preparing a ground for the policy recommendations.

The study at hand shall be useful for regional, national and EU stakeholders by (1) giving an overview

of the most relevant programmes/initiatives, (2) providing brief evaluation of the relevant activities

and (3) formulating policy recommendations for their more desirable use with regard to the EUSDR.

Additionally, certain parts of the report, such as the introduction of stakeholders can be relevant to

the research community in DR as well who are seeking for cooperation opportunities.


15

2.2 Methodology

The elaboration of the report was implemented through the following steps:


16

Update and revision of the report

reviewing the list of stakeholders further interviews (via phone or skype)gathering information for the impact

assessment

Organizing two Stakeholders' Workshops

gathering further information on stakeholders and their approaches

discussing the outcomes of the report

Evaluation of results, compilation of the report and formulation of policy recommendations

Feeding the database Compilation of the report

Reaching out to stakeholders and gathering empirical evidence

Circulating questionnairesConducting personal, phone

or online interviewsAsking for partners inputs Further desk research

Set up of a database

Reflecting the main aspects of the investigation

Desk research to collect basic data

Looking for basic information on stakeholders Gathering contact data

Selecting the most relevant stakeholders

Narrowing down the initial list of relevant stakeholders based on the criteria defined

Defining the main aspects of investigation

Defining the criteria of selection and aspects of information gathering on stakeholders

Identification of main stakeholders

Desk research Recommendation of project partners


17

(1) Identification of the main stakeholders in the field of RI in the Danube Region

As mentioned before, an important number of stakeholders are active in the Danube Region, including

the fields of research and innovation. However, they are diverse with regard to their objectives,

geographical scope, scientific field (if any), and running programmes/projects, etc. Therefore the first

step was to investigate stakeholders having any relevance for research, innovation and education. It is

important to highlight that stakeholders involved in research and innovation were analysed in the first

place, but those relevant in the field of education, especially higher education are also mentioned due

to the significant relations of this sector to RI. Last but not least, some regional actors bearing

important tracks in regional cooperation were also examined to a certain extent looking for

transferable good practices. The identification of stakeholders was executed through desk research

and partners’ recommendations which resulted in a table including almost 90 actors.1 This list was

planned to be further narrowed down (step 3), after thorough examination of the identification of the

initial population (step 2).

(2) Defining the main aspects of the investigation

The main aspects of the investigation on stakeholders had to be laid down in advance to narrow down

the list of stakeholders to be reviewed. Bearing in mind the character of the report, namely the fact

that it shall formulate policy recommendations, the following aspects were defined which had to be

answered:

- character of the initiative/stakeholder

- main objective of the initiative/stakeholder

- recent achievements

- future targets

- type of programmes funded (if any)

- good practices

- relation to other stakeholders

(3) Selecting the most relevant stakeholders from the point of view of research, innovation and

education

Though almost 90 stakeholders were identified in the first step,2 many of them were only marginally

related to research and innovation. Consequently stakeholders gathered in the initial database were

prioritized according to their relevance to RI, education and/or having important experience in regional

cooperation. As a result, 40 stakeholders were considered important for the elaboration of the report

and the policy recommendations (from now on referred as stakeholders under investigation or

selected stakeholders). It must be indicated that out of these forty stakeholders, a few have strictly

European or international character (i.e. UNESCO, EURADA, Eurochambers, etc.) and do not have any

special focus on the region or the countries covered by the Danube Strategy; however, it was

considered important to check whether they respond by any means to the priorities of the Strategy or

if they have such plans for the near future.

1 See Annex I for the full list of stakeholders. 2 The full list of stakeholders and arguments for their selection are in Annex I.


18

As it will be described below, the first list was subject to further improvement during the consolidation

phase of the report thus it was amended with other relevant stakeholders complying with the criteria

set in the report, growing the number of targeted stakeholders to 49.

(4) Desk research to collect basic data on stakeholders

Important part of data gathering, especially in case of basic information, was carried out through desk

research. This step included mainly online search and the use of existing databases (i.e. WBC-Inco.Net

database, Danube-region.eu database, studies elaborated by EUSDR Priority Area Steering Groups,

etc.); but in case of lack of adequate data (i.e. lack of website, lack of updated website, lack of previous

analysis from the relevant aspects), other studies or programme documents were studied.3 Also,

contact details of stakeholders were gathered through this step. The preliminary data was in line with

the entries of the project website to feed the online database described below. Entries consisting of

this data have been continuously uploaded into the online database (available at http://danube-

inco.net/cooperation_and_networking/organisations).

(5) Set up of a database on stakeholders under investigation

The findings of the desk research were transferred into a database reflecting the main aspects of the

report. However, data accumulated through the desk research was considered inadequate for the

compilation of the report since the quantity and quality of available data on the selected stakeholders

was entirely haphazard.

(6) Reaching out to stakeholders and gathering empirical evidence

In order to gain the missing information, first of all, a questionnaire was elaborated highlighting the

main aspects of the database. The questionnaire was circulated among selected stakeholders.4

Nevertheless, it turned out soon that this method for data collection could not be successfully applied

in case of the target group at hand despite efforts for follow-up (e-mail, phone calls). Only four

questionnaires were completed during a one-month period.

Therefore it was decided to adjust the working method to the specificities of the selected stakeholders.

Targeted stakeholders can be reached mainly in person (or via phone), through their own networks.

Since contact details are hardly available on the websites, we relied on our and the project partners’

network to get in touch with these stakeholders. In case of lack of direct contact it proved to be almost

impossible to reach the right person and collect answers to the inquiries. Additionally, targeted

stakeholders were not expected to provide general information on their initiative or programme and

were in certain cases reluctant to share strategic or budgetary issues, therefore they were subject to

very focused and targeted inquiries meaning that the interviews had to focus on questions of key

importance, namely (1) main outcomes of previous years, (2) future plans, (3) possible transferable

good practices, and (4) self-evaluation of their initiative/programme. As a result, missing information

was collected through telephone, online or personal interviews. This increased the number of

respondents significantly. Altogether, 11 telephone interviews were conducted,5 whereas in case of 13

3 List of literature and other sources are listed in section 9 ’Bibliography’. 4 The full list of stakeholders and arguments for their selection are in Annex I. 5 List of interviews can be found in Annex III.

http://danube-inco.net/cooperation_and_networking/organisations

http://danube-inco.net/cooperation_and_networking/organisations


19

stakeholders, one of the project partners being member/having close relations to the stakeholder

provided the necessary information.

Method No. of cases Stakeholders

Questionnaire completed 4 CASEE, CLDR, IAD, RCC Phone/personal interviews 11 EURADA, CEEPUS, CoDCR, DCCA, DRC, DU,

DanuClus, Ministerial Commission for EUSDR of Hungary, UNESCO, VEF, YCDN

Information provided by project partner

13 BSEC, CEI, CEI Network of Focal Points on S&T, CEI UniNet, EEN, Salzburg Forum, WBC SP, Steinbeis Danube Centre, Ulm Follow-up Group, Visegrad Found, etc.

Sole desk research 12 Black Sea - Danube Regional Network for Social & Economic Innovation, Danube Alliance, Danube Area Interregional Group at the CoR, Danubiz, Eurochambers, ECA, SECI, SEECP, SEEIC, Visegrad Group, etc.

(7) Evaluation of results, compilation of the report and formulation of policy recommendations

The processing of the report was based on the database (as mentioned before, available on the

website) which consisted of the results of the desk research, the questionnaire, the interviews, and

any additional information provided by partners or the targeted stakeholders. The main aspects of the

investigation were the following:

- type of stakeholders,

- main goals, objectives,

- geographical coverage,

- targeted field(s),

- scientific areas targeted,

- main outcomes,

- good practices to be transferred,

- activities funded, if any.

The introduction of stakeholders was elaborated with regard to the following aspects:

- focusing on the relation of the initiative to RI and education,

- not repeating information available in previous reports,6

- highlighting good practices – i.e. any kind of activities of the stakeholders under investigation

which work well and thus would be worth transferring and applying them to other initiatives.

This could include: communication with the target groups/audience, dissemination of

information and achievements, ways of attracting funds, building of networks, creation of

platforms/fora, etc. (in blue boxes)

6 For instance, Müller, B., Klee, G., Hunya, G. (2014): Socio-economic Assessment of the Danube Region: State of the Region, Challenges and Strategy Development. Available at http://ftp.zew.de/pub/zew-docs/gutachten/DanubeRegionFinalReportPartI2014.pdf (downloaded on 27.08.2014). The study gives a detailed overview on the economic and social situation of the Danube Region, including the introduction of stakeholders relevant from the view of competition, economic growth and development.


20

- information (if available) on funding instrument (in grey boxes).

(8) Organizing two Stakeholders’ Workshops

Relating to the report, the organization of three events was envisioned with the following three main

objectives:

(1) disseminating the results of Deliverable 2.9 Mapping of relevant stakeholders describing

activities, positions and good practices including recommendations for synergies,

(2) promoting the extension of existing frameworks, enabling the harmonization of synergies and

supporting strategic decisions, and

(3) collecting further information for the update of the report due in the last year of the project.

Two of these workshops took place in the second year of the project. The first Danube-INCO.NET

Stakeholders’ Workshop under the title Enhancing synergies in research and innovation programmes

in the region was organized back-to-back with the meeting of the Steering Platform on Research for

the Western Balkan Countries on 8 June 2015 in Budapest focusing on specific synergies between

research, innovation (R&I) and higher education (HE) programmes and other activities supporting

researchers & innovators in the Danube Region with those specifically active in and for the Western

Balkans. The event was attended by 37 stakeholders from almost all countries of the Danube Region

and some beyond (Turkey, Italy).

The second Stakeholders’ Workshop under the title Paving the way for joint actions in the Danube

Region: Sharing good practices and identifying synergies in research and innovation support was held

the 4th Annual Forum of the EU Strategy for the Danube Region on 30 October 2015 in Ulm. The

workshop had a special focus on research and innovation support, therefore addressed two of the

EUSDR priority areas: PA 7 „Knowledge Society” and PA 8 „Competitiveness”. In addition to the listed

goals, the workshop aimed to

- to facilitate their further involvement of the relevant stakeholders in the implementation of

the EUSDR,

- to promote dialogue within the triple helix (academia-industry-policy).7

The event consisted of short elevator speeches of 14 stakeholders with a focus on good practices and

means to promote dialogue within the triple helix on the one hand and to find ways of reinforcing this

kind of cooperation along the Danube River on the other hand.

The third workshop is planned to be organized during the last year of the project to make aware all

related stakeholders on the outcomes of the report and disseminate the outcomes to an audience as

broad as possible.

(9) Update and revision of the report

Based on the inputs gathered during the workshops the report was updated and partly revised. First,

the original list of stakeholders was amended partly by adding new ones which were found important

7 List of panellists is in Annex IV.


21

from the view of the original goals of the report and partly by taking out stakeholders which finally

failed to meet the criteria.

As a result, 49 stakeholders became subject to the current version.8 The composition of selected

stakeholders is as follows: most stakeholders (27%) are networks, followed by EU related bodies (19%)

and international organizations (13%). Category “Other”, which represents a significant ratio (17%),

contains the following types: forums, conferences and intergovernmental/regional cooperation.

Figure 1: Type of Selected Stakeholders

As regards the geographical scope of the stakeholders under investigation, most of them have regional

scope (22 representing 67 %) and only 15% have international scope. Even less, only 9% can be

considered as transnational or European initiatives or organisations. Regarding the regional scope, the

region in question is either the Danube Region or a region which is linked to it. Out of the 22, 14 focus

literally on the Danube Region.

8 The full list of stakeholders consist of the newly integrated ones (highlighted) too in Annex I.

19%

2%

13%

2%8%

4%

27%

4%

4%

17%

Type of Initiatives

EU

Government/ministry

International Organisation

Agency/Fund

Association/NGO

Danube Region local organisation

Network

Company

Research Institute

Other


22

Figure 2: Geographical Scope of the Initiatives

Bearing in mind the special needs of these stakeholders, all those which were added to the original list

were contacted through telephone by asking for interview. Positive feedback was received from more

than half of them. Consequently information was gathered through the following way:

Method No. of cases Stakeholders

Phone/personal interviews 8 UPDR, ICPDR, IDM, EUA, JRC, OECD, WBEDIF, CESCI

Sole desk research 7 ACA, DSRN, DCSF, Viadonau, Water JPI, EIT Climate KIC & InnoEnergy, Eureka

In order to align the report to the outcomes of the workshops, the interview guideline was amended

slightly and more attention was put on the involvement of stakeholders under investigation into the

triple helix.

In addition to this, stakeholders newly interviewed or participated at the workshops were asked to

provide information for the impact assessment of their initiatives. They were addressed by 6 questions

via mail or personally. 16 answers were collected and the results fed into the relevant section (4.6

Impact Assessment).

Based on these information the existing database was further improved, whereas the report was

updated and partly revised.

2.3 Definitions

The report refers mainly to stakeholders and initiatives as the subject of the analysis. When referring

to targeted stakeholders we mean: policy makers, programme owners, organisations, initiatives,

institutions, scientific councils, etc. who can be the subjects of this report. In other words stakeholders

are those that can affect or are affected by RI aspects of EUSDR at regional and/or transnational levels.

Further on, stakeholders under investigation cover generally broader geographic areas. Regional refers

to programmes/initiatives covering a large geographic region, i.e. Central or Southeast Europe, Danube

67%

9%

9%

15%

Scope of the Initiative

Regional

Transnational/cross-border

European

International


23

Region, etc. Compared to this, transnational refers to programmes/initiatives crossing or transcending

national borders; its members do not necessarily come from neighbouring countries (e.g. VEF).

2.4 Limitations

The authors of the paper, as well as other project partners contributing to the elaboration of the report

did their utmost to provide an overview on relevant stakeholders. We are convinced that with the

current report this objective was achieved to a large extent. However, we must take into account some

limitations to the process:

- only stakeholders considered as of utmost importance became subject of the analysis,

- despite the significant attempts done aiming to gather all the relevant information on the

selected stakeholders, some gaps remained,

- some answers remained uncompleted even in case of completed questionnaires, interviews,

mainly due to the fact that it was not applicable in case of the stakeholder at hand;

- new developments, especially during the implementation of the EUSDR, can always make out-

of-date the findings of the current paper even in a short run.

The recommendations presented in this paper shall not be regarded as unchangeable and obligatory

propositions for the relevant stakeholders; it shall rather serve as a basis for discussion.


24

3 Introducing stakeholders, related programmes and activities with a special

focus on their relevance to R&I activities within Danube Region The present report examined 49 stakeholders (including initiatives and programmes) among others:

networks (e.g. DRC, CASEE), associations (e.g. EURADA), organizations of an intergovernmental nature

(e.g. CEI), international organizations (e.g. BSEC, Visegrad Group), EU programmes and initiatives (e.g.

SEE, Danube TP) as well as other relevant international organizations (e.g. UNESCO, OECD,

Eurochambers). These stakeholders were considered of utmost importance either from the point of

view of research, innovation and the relevant fields of education (i.e. higher education) or from the

view of experience in regional cooperation among the hundred actors present of the Danube Region.

Stakeholders are presented based on their character and geographical coverage according to the

following table:

Stakeholders based in the

DR

Regional and/or

transnational stakeholders

Stakeholders at EU level

Stakeholders at

international level

Total

Networks 11 1 4 - 16 Organizations with status of international organization

2 3 - 2 7

Organizations with intergovernmental feature

- 4 - - 4

Associations/NGOs 1 - - 3 4 Agencies/funds/programmes - 4 3 - 7 Other 5 4 29 - 11 Total 19 16 9 5 49

Table 1: Alignment criteria of presented stakeholders

3.1 Stakeholders based in the Danube Region

3.1.1 Networks

Danube Rectors’ Conference (DRC)

The Danube Rectors’ Conference is a strong and active network of almost 70 universities in the Danube

Region founded in 1983 in Vienna. Their aim is to improve higher education in teaching and research,

and to support their member universities by establishing sustainable contacts. The founding countries

Austria, Germany and Hungary have been joined by Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, the

Czech Republic, Montenegro, Poland, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia and Ukraine. Prestigious

annual conferences (e.g. in 2014 on Digital culture - the synergy between higher education and ICT),

summer schools, Working Groups on Higher Education Management and International Relations are

also organised and maintained by the initiative.

The establishment of a well-functioning network supporting knowledge transfer can be mentioned as the main achievement of the initiative. Another important outcome of the initiative which can be considered as a good practice is that in 2013 DRC achieved a legal entity enabling smoother participation of its members in various projects through the network: in project proposals DRC

9 Climate KIC and KIC InnoEnergy are counted as one KIC.


25

becomes the partner, whereas the relevant partner universities implement respective activities.10 Also, projects supported by DRC are of high quality which serves as a guarantee at various fora.

DRC has close ties with many regional and European stakeholders, such as the Danube Academies

Conference, Adriatic Rectors Conference, European Commission, European University Association,

Baltic Rectors Conference, Visegrad Fund, Central European Exchange Program for University Studies

(CEEPUS), and the ICA Regional Network for Central and South Eastern Europe (CASEE).

DRC launched a fund in 2015 available for its members: the DRC Fund for Incentives is funded from the budget of the network into which each full member contributes €500 per year as membership fee. The purpose of the fund is to support the cooperation of DRC members which contributes to achieving the goals of EU Strategy for the Danube region in the priority areas where the universities have a strong position and their participation is exclusively needed. Applicants can apply for €5,000 for projects implemented by 5 members, out of which there is at least one university from a non-EU country.

For further information see: http://danube-inco.net/object/organisation/14448

Danube Universities (DU)

This regional network was established in 2005 aiming to build a network of partner universities and

strengthening existing cooperation through student exchange, teacher exchange and staff exchange,

building up of a competence network, using each other’s know how and laboratory facilities, achieving

synergy between science and industry through stronger cooperation between universities and

industrial companies. University of Novi Sad (SRB), University of Óbuda (HU), Széchenyi István

University (HU), Slovak University of Technology Bratislava (SK), University of Applied Sciences

Technikum Wien (AT), and Ulm University of Applied Sciences (DE) are the members of the initiative

as it is presented on the map below (Figure 3). Research, education and innovation are considered to

be important targeted fields of Danube Universities. There is a special focus on the following scientific

areas: ICT, energy, environment and climate change.

Common education projects (e.g. summer academies) and intensive cooperation in the network are considered to be the main outcomes of the initiative from 2007 to 2013. Study visits, intensive exchange of know-how, and mutual use of laboratory facilities can be regarded as transferable practices.

DU counts on regional (Baden-Württemberg), national and EU funding sources for supporting

multilateral programmes; for example R&D projects and networking events (workshops, conferences),

summer academies, and lecture series. While DU is committed to build up a research network along

the Danube, DU is open to any interested participants; there is a possibility to join the thematic working

groups on e-mobility, smart grids, photovoltaics, energy meteorology and energy efficiency and solar

heat.

10 However, DRC has already faced difficulties with regard to its legal entity; since it is registered in Belgium, it cannot take part in relevant transnational cooperation programmes, such Central Europe or Danube TPs as full partner since it is not based in the programme areas.

http://danube-inco.net/object/organisation/14448


26

Figure 3: Members of Danube Universities (edited by RCISD)


Council of Danube Cities and Regions (CoDCR)

CoDCR was established in 2003 and reinforced following the launch of the Ulm Process. Through

connecting city and regional councils in the DR, the Council of the Danube Cities and Regions offers

assistance to all potential partners in identifying appropriate themes and modalities for cooperation

in implementing the EU Strategy for the Danube Region, on both functional and thematic fields of

assistance. The key principles which will be mainstreamed throughout the entire structure and

activities of the Council are: the respect for democracy and human rights, the rule of law, good

governance, the principles of market economy, social and environmental sustainable development,

the principles of ethnic and gender equality as well as the principle of regional balance. . It has a special

focus on culture and tourism as well. CoDCR is active in the field of competitiveness and RI with a

special focus on the Digital Agenda, and in education as well considering these sectors as of utmost

important contributing to the growth of the Danube Region.

In the upcoming years they strive for extending cooperation in the frame of the “Urban Platform

Danube Region” established under the auspices of PA10 “Institutional Capacity and Cooperation”.

Additionally, the main challenge will be to build up a kind of Danube Cities (or City) Union, to create a

strong lobbying entity which could represent the interests of the members at the European

Commission, PA Coordinators and national governments.

So far CoDCR organized various activities, such as information campaigns (Rivershow: Democracy and Citizens), cultural events (in Novi Sad, Galati or Ukrainian cities), building up the Danube Cultural Alliance and forming the European Danube Youth Alliance (organizing youth camps and summer schools). Additionally, a good example of cluster cooperation is the Danube Media Network project (DaMe Network) aiming to assist the ideas and plans of the Danube Strategy and the values of the entire Danube Region.



27

Figure 4: Member cities of CoDCR (source: www.danubecities.eu)


Urban Platform Danube Region (UPDR)

As mentioned before, UPDR was established under the framework of Priority Area 10 “Institutional

Capacity and Cooperation” of the EU Strategy for the Danube Region to integrate regional and local

administrations, city associations and civil society into the implementation of the EUSDR. The main

priority of UPDR is to establish this triple network in the Danube Region, with great emphasis on cities

and city networks. The reason behind this objective is that the Danube Region is one of the European

regions with the largest density of cities.

The main outcome of UPRD is the development and dissemination of good practices and solutions for cities and urban areas through networking and knowledge exchange activities. An example is the smart city concept for Vienna that can be adopted by other cities within UPDR or the transport projects in Ljubljana. The involvement and participation of citizens regarding urban matters is also a major outcome.

The platform aims to promote the development of cities with various pilot initiatives within the smart

city concept, sustainable city concept or inclusive city concept. UPDR cooperates with other relevant

stakeholders in the Danube Region, for instance with Danube Civil Society Forum or JRC, but their

major cooperation partners are city associations, NGOs and academia working in the field of regional

development.

For further information see: https://danube-inco.net/object/organisation/13577

Danube Alliance

Danube Alliance is an informal, demand-driven and results-oriented forum for regional cooperation in

the Danube Region. They bring together people who are active in a variety of different sectors:

transport, energy, tourism and culture, environment, biodiversity, quality of waters, research,

education and ICT, competitiveness, institutional capacity and cooperation, security. As a forum for

regional cooperation with a multi-stakeholder approach – government ministries, European

http://www.danubecities.eu/


https://danube-inco.net/object/organisation/13577


28

Commission, intergovernmental organizations, NGOs, academic and financial institutions, local and

regional networks, etc. -, the main aim of the Danube Alliance is to take part in the coordination of the

implementation of the EU Strategy for the Danube Region.


Danubiz

Danubiz was founded in 2013 on the principles of innovation and subsidiarity. Danubiz is actively

promoting regional sustainable development in the Danube area by providing market information

relevant for SMEs, supporting international market access via trade shows, organizing and promoting

sector specific trade events of the Danube Region, motivating cross-border networking and co-

working, building up international cooperation, value-chains, providing entrepreneurial training,

connecting the education sector with business, providing consulting and financial services to do

international business. Education, business and consulting belong to their main profile. The network is

open for new partners and stakeholders who are able and willing to bring forth expertise and service

for sustainable SME development in the Danube Region. Danubiz is in close cooperation with the Ulm

Follow-up Group

In 2012, a Ministerial Conference was held in Ulm followed by regular meetings resulting in the

establishment of the Ulm Follow-up Group. The Communiqué endorsed in 2012 emphasizes the

intensification of cooperation in research, education and innovation of the Danube countries. The

provision of a fund was planned to support research projects in DR, however, the measure has not

been implemented. The main purpose of the initiative aims to open up national programmes for

multilateral activities.

The result of the meetings of the Ulm Follow Up Working Group was a multilateral call for the Danube Region launched on the initiative of the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research. All members of the Ulm Follow Up Working Group (i.e. Ministries of the Danube countries and the European Commission) were invited to discuss the call management and evaluation procedures and to contribute to the funding of this initiative by national funds. Three countries, namely Serbia, Hungary and Moldova were co-funding the first call; applicants from other countries could be supported by national funds on a case-by-case basis. 63 project applications were submitted.

Close cooperation with the EUSDR is sought by integrating representatives of the PA 7 and 8 of the

EUSDR in the Working Group established on the follow-up of the Ministerial Conference. The Group

cooperates with several stakeholders in the Region, such as EUSDR PA7 & 8, the EU Commission (DG

REGIO) and the Joint Research Centre (JRC).


European Commission Joint Research Centre (JRC): Danube Innovation Partnerships, Scientific

Support for the EUSDR

The European Commission's Joint Research Centre (JRC) supports EU policies with independent

evidence throughout the whole policy cycle and gives scientific and technical support to policy makers

and stakeholders. JRC is coordinating the Scientific Support to the Danube Strategy initiative which

contributes to the implementation of the EUSDR in two different ways. Firstly, the initiative addresses




29

the scientific needs necessary for the implementation of the Strategy. Secondly, it contributes to the

strengthening of cooperation amongst the scientific community in the DR.

The initiative is separated to seven units, more precisely to four thematic clusters and three horizontal

activities. The four thematic flagship clusters focus on the key resources of the Danube Region, i.e.

Danube Water Nexus, Danube Land and Soil Nexus, Danube Air Nexus, Danube Bio-energy Nexus. The

three horizontal activities complement these vertical clusters, i.e. Danube Reference Data and Service

Infrastructure, Smart Specialisation in the Danube Region, and Danube Innovation Partnership.

Danube Water Nexus (DWN)

DWN addresses water challenges identified by the EU Blueprint to Safeguard Europe’s Water Resources and the EUSDR.

Topics covered: environmental and socio-economic consequences of changing agriculture-energy pressures on water, sustainable futures of water resources use.

Danube Land and Soil Nexus (DLSN)

DLSN focuses on sustainable and efficient use of soil resources to contribute to the balanced development of the DR while preserving the environment and managing environmental risks such as floods and droughts.

Topics covered: land and soil availability; land and soil quality; land and soil-related risks; preservation and restoration of above- and belowground ecosystems and biodiversity.

Danube Bioenergy Nexus (DBN)

DBN addresses the challenges of bioenergy production in the Danube Region and focuses on resource assessment, statistical monitoring and assessment of the possible impacts on agriculture and environment.

Topics covered: transport of biomass on Danube River; local bio-heat; agricultural biomass feedstock for biogas; bioenergy status & progress; public support schemes & funding mechanisms for bioenergy; agricultural crop residues availability; scientific & technical networking in the field of bioenergy.

Danube Air Nexus (DAN)

DAN deals with air-related issues in the Region and with the assessment of air quality sources and impacts of air pollution on health.

Topics covered: identifying air pollution sources; scenarios of future emissions and air quality; climate impact on air quality and health; assessing impacts of PAH on health.

Table 2: Thematic flagship clusters launched by JRC

With networking activities JRC can actively contribute to the deepening of regional cooperation and

implementation of the Danube Strategy. JRC cooperates with almost 1000 stakeholders altogether in

the Danube Region, including academies of sciences, rectors’ conferences, organizations from the

public (ministries involved in the implementation of EUSDR) and private sphere (through smart

specialization strategies and Danube Innovation Partnership). The JRC initiatives are also well

JRC adopted a cross-cutting, collaborative method, the nexus-approach, to take into account interdependencies across topics, borders and responsibilities. The output of the JRC Danube initiative includes high-level scientific events, thematic workshops, summer schools, and provides reports, comprehensive data and tools publicly accessible at the JRC Science Hub. The JRC scientific support aims at helping decision-makers to take evidence informed policy decisions needed for the implementation of EUSDR. The JRC initiative attempts to stimulate the development of autonomous capacities in the DR leveraging on areas of JRC expertise.


30

embedded in the activities of the EUSDR Priority Areas. JRC works together with seven out of the

eleven EUSDR Priority Areas.


Steinbeis Danube Center


Danube Strategy Research Network (DSRN)

The Danube Strategy Research Network was founded in 2012 as an informal interdisciplinary group of

researchers cooperating in research projects, publications, discussion rounds and conference

organisations. The research objectives of DSRN members are firstly the improvement of the macro-

regional concept and especially of the EUSDR, secondly the support of the civil society participation

and thirdly to accompany the process of European integration in a critical, constructive and sustainable

manner. The network offers a platform for transnational and interdisciplinary exchange in such

research projects. DSRN connects researchers from various fields of science such as political science,

cultural studies, sociology, law, economics, and geography.

For further information see: https://danube-inco.net/object/project/15654

Danube Cluster Network (DanuClus)

The cooperation initiative called DanuClus was established in 2013, during the strategic-political

meeting of the PA8 Working Group “Clusters of Excellence”, held in Visegrad, Hungary. The objective

of the initiative is to link clusters, cluster managers, cluster experts and cluster policy-makers from the

Danube Region, to prepare clusters in this geographic area for the new EU funding period of 2014-

2020. In practice, DanuClus collects and elaborates project ideas for clusters and supports their

implementation.

The main outcome of the initiative in the past year was to create an expanded network which is successively growing. Their last meeting was attended by 60 members though the initiative cannot secure funding for its members.

As regards the upcoming period, DanuClus aims to enhance joint strategic and transnational

cooperation in the near future. DanuClus cooperates with stakeholders playing a relevant role in the

Danube Region, as well as the Black Sea Region. They cooperate with national cluster associations,

ministries responsible for cluster policy, and they are working together with Steinbeis Innovation

GmbH.


Young Citizens Danube Network (YCDN)

The Young Citizens Danube Network is a network of students from the entire Danube Region. It was

established in 2010 at Andrássy Gyula University, Budapest, with the following motto: United in

Diversity, along the Danube, in Europe. The main priority of the network was to create a representation

group for the interests of young people in the Danube Region. The aim and mission of YCDN is to incite

civic activism and participation among young people in the Danube Region, by developing and

conducting small-scale, bottom-up projects together with international partner organizations and



https://danube-inco.net/object/project/15654



31

initiatives. YCDN will contribute to developing a course of postgraduate studies (Master of Danube

Studies) which is the initiative of Ulm-based European Danube Academy. Their aim is to instruct young

researchers to realise development projects in the Danube Area.


Danube Civil Society Forum (DCSF)

The Danube Civil Society Forum was founded in 2011 as a platform for civil society dialogue and

networking in the Danube Region under the EUSDR. The forum functions as an interface for structured

consultations between civil society and public and private authorities on the regional, national and EU

level as well as to international and intergovernmental organisations active in the region. The overall

aim of the forum is to enhance the participation of civil society and the networking in the framework

of EUSDR and to increase civil society cooperation, opinion and capacity building. The DCSF works in

close cooperation with the responsible EU institutions during its activities.


European Danube Academy

The European Danube Academy (Europäische Donau Akademie) is an institutional platform for

networking activities of the Danube countries, cities and regions which aims at supporting the

cooperation process in the Danube Region. The Academy serves as a platform for the cooperation in

sciences, culture, politics, education and media. The institution supports activities in the fields of:

humanities and social sciences; democracy and law; environment, energy and mobility; medicine and

public health; culture and media.


3.1.2 Associations with the status of international organization

International Association for Danube Research (IAD)

The main objective of IAD is cooperation and networking in scientific research in the Danube Region,

promoting and coordinating activities in the fields of limnology, water management, water protection

and sustainable development. In 1998, IAD obtained observer status in the International Commission

for the Protection of the Danube River (ICPDR). Their delegates participate in various Expert Groups

and develop tools and measures to protect the Danube River and to reach a sustainable river basin

management as the ultimate goal of the Water Framework Directive (EU-WFD).

As a representative of the scientific community, IAD also actively supports the implementation of the

EUSDR as a step towards sustainable development in the DR. Environment and climate change are

important targeted fields of the network. As regards the main outcomes of the recent years, (1)

exchange of knowledge between member countries and institutions, (2) research cooperation with

partner institutions, (3) support provided for young students can be mentioned. Their target areas in

the period of 2014-2020 are summarized in the Sturgeon Action Plan 2020 Danube Invasive Alien

Species Network Learning Region. They cooperate with the International Commission for the

Protection of the Danube River (ICPDR), Partnership for Improvement of Danube Infrastructure and

Navigation (PIDIN), and the Institute for the Danube and Central Europe (IDM).







32

International Commission for the Protection of the Danube River (ICPDR)

ICPDR is an international organization established in 1998 to implement the Danube River Protection

Convention. Its main priority is to ensure Danube basin-wide sustainable and equitable water

management and flood risk management, which is done via the implementation of the EU Water

Framework Directive and EU Floods Directive. ICPDR is the main coordination platform for the

transnational water management activities and was established by the Danube countries and the

European Union for this purpose.

The Danube River Basin Management Plan 2015-2021 and the Danube Flood Risk Management Plan 2015-2021 set management priorities for the upcoming 6 years. For their articulation, the 3rd Joint Danube Survey was organized, which was the biggest river research expedition. The Danube Climate Change Adaption Strategy and the Guiding Principles on Sustainable Hydropower Development in the Danube Basin are also amongst the main outcomes of the organization.

ICPDR puts major emphasis on transparency and stakeholder involvement in its activities. Therefore

23 Observer Organizations from different economic sectors, academia, NGOs, etc. are directly involved

in the work of the organization. ICPDR also cooperates with other river commissions in the Danube

basin, like the Sava River Basin Commission, Danube Commission on Navigation, etc.


3.1.3 Associations/NGOs

Danube Chambers of Commerce Association (DCCA)

DCCA aims to harmonize the activity of the chambers of commerce along the Danube Region. Its

mission is enhancing economic-financial cooperation, as well as strengthening the cohesion between

the entrepreneurs and enterprises operating in different countries. Innovation, education, finance and

economy are the main targeted sectors of the association.

According to the strategy of DCCA, participation in the development of the priorities of the Danube

Strategy, information circulation, initiatives, integration and cohesion, matters on environment, trade,

tourism and promoting advocacy of interests are the main objectives of the initiative.

Good practices of DCCA which could be transferred to other regional stakeholders are as follows:

- elaboration of joint proposals with other chambers of commerce from the Region; - becoming a well-established network of chambers of trade and industry capable of

preparing joint proposals; - having addressed calls under Southeast Europe ETC, Danube ETC, Start Danube Programme

and planning to prepare projects for calls under Horizon 2020, COSME. The Chamber of Commerce and Industry of Budapest, whose president is currently the president of DCCA, is deeply involved in PA8 WG for cooperation of economic entities where they also represent the interests of the DCCA.


3.1.4 Other types of initiatives/stakeholders

Ulm Follow-up Group




33

In 2012, a Ministerial Conference was held in Ulm followed by regular meetings resulting in the

establishment of the Ulm Follow-up Group. The Communiqué endorsed in 2012 emphasizes the

intensification of cooperation in research, education and innovation of the Danube countries. The

provision of a fund was planned to support research projects in DR, however, the measure has not

been implemented. The main purpose of the initiative aims to open up national programmes for

multilateral activities.

The result of the meetings of the Ulm Follow Up Working Group was a multilateral call for the Danube Region launched on the initiative of the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research. All members of the Ulm Follow Up Working Group (i.e. Ministries of the Danube countries and the European Commission) were invited to discuss the call management and evaluation procedures and to contribute to the funding of this initiative by national funds. Three countries, namely Serbia, Hungary and Moldova were co-funding the first call; applicants from other countries could be supported by national funds on a case-by-case basis. 63 project applications were submitted.

Close cooperation with the EUSDR is sought by integrating representatives of the PA 7 and 8 of the

EUSDR in the Working Group established on the follow-up of the Ministerial Conference. The Group

cooperates with several stakeholders in the Region, such as EUSDR PA7 & 8, the EU Commission (DG

REGIO) and the Joint Research Centre (JRC).


European Commission Joint Research Centre (JRC): Danube Innovation Partnerships, Scientific

Support for the EUSDR

The European Commission's Joint Research Centre (JRC) supports EU policies with independent

evidence throughout the whole policy cycle and gives scientific and technical support to policy makers

and stakeholders. JRC is coordinating the Scientific Support to the Danube Strategy initiative which

contributes to the implementation of the EUSDR in two different ways. Firstly, the initiative addresses

the scientific needs necessary for the implementation of the Strategy. Secondly, it contributes to the

strengthening of cooperation amongst the scientific community in the DR.

The initiative is separated to seven units, more precisely to four thematic clusters and three horizontal

activities. The four thematic flagship clusters focus on the key resources of the Danube Region, i.e.

Danube Water Nexus, Danube Land and Soil Nexus, Danube Air Nexus, Danube Bio-energy Nexus. The

three horizontal activities complement these vertical clusters, i.e. Danube Reference Data and Service

Infrastructure, Smart Specialisation in the Danube Region, and Danube Innovation Partnership.

Danube Water Nexus (DWN)

DWN addresses water challenges identified by the EU Blueprint to Safeguard Europe’s Water Resources and the EUSDR.

JRC adopted a cross-cutting, collaborative method, the nexus-approach, to take into account interdependencies across topics, borders and responsibilities. The output of the JRC Danube initiative includes high-level scientific events, thematic workshops, summer schools, and provides reports, comprehensive data and tools publicly accessible at the JRC Science Hub. The JRC scientific support aims at helping decision-makers to take evidence informed policy decisions needed for the implementation of EUSDR. The JRC initiative attempts to stimulate the development of autonomous capacities in the DR leveraging on areas of JRC expertise.



34

Topics covered: environmental and socio-economic consequences of changing agriculture-energy pressures on water, sustainable futures of water resources use.

Danube Land and Soil Nexus (DLSN)

DLSN focuses on sustainable and efficient use of soil resources to contribute to the balanced development of the DR while preserving the environment and managing environmental risks such as floods and droughts.

Topics covered: land and soil availability; land and soil quality; land and soil-related risks; preservation and restoration of above- and belowground ecosystems and biodiversity.

Danube Bioenergy Nexus (DBN)

DBN addresses the challenges of bioenergy production in the Danube Region and focuses on resource assessment, statistical monitoring and assessment of the possible impacts on agriculture and environment.

Topics covered: transport of biomass on Danube River; local bio-heat; agricultural biomass feedstock for biogas; bioenergy status & progress; public support schemes & funding mechanisms for bioenergy; agricultural crop residues availability; scientific & technical networking in the field of bioenergy.

Danube Air Nexus (DAN)

DAN deals with air-related issues in the Region and with the assessment of air quality sources and impacts of air pollution on health.

Topics covered: identifying air pollution sources; scenarios of future emissions and air quality; climate impact on air quality and health; assessing impacts of PAH on health.

Table 3: Thematic flagship clusters launched by JRC

With networking activities JRC can actively contribute to the deepening of regional cooperation and

implementation of the Danube Strategy. JRC cooperates with almost 1000 stakeholders altogether in

the Danube Region, including academies of sciences, rectors’ conferences, organizations from the

public (ministries involved in the implementation of EUSDR) and private sphere (through smart

specialization strategies and Danube Innovation Partnership). The JRC initiatives are also well

embedded in the activities of the EUSDR Priority Areas. JRC works together with seven out of the

eleven EUSDR Priority Areas.


Steinbeis Danube Center

Steinbeis Danube Center takes an advocating role in the complex process of development and

implementation of the Danube Strategy. Its main priority is to support business sector by sharing

experiences and to make SMEs more competitive by establishing technology and knowledge transfer

between various economic sectors. A further objective for the upcoming years is to involve more SMEs

in the implementation of the EUSDR. They cooperate with the Steering Group of PA8, the Romanian

Advisory Board of Danube Strategy, and Executive Board in the Council of Danube Cities and Regions,

and the Danube Alliance.

In the frame of WG Innovation and Technology Transfer of PA8, Steinbeis Danube Center launched the Danubian Initiative for Innovation and Technology Transfer. The so-called Danube Technology Transfer Centres (DTCs) located at various universities along the Danube coordinate activities aiming to



35

reinforce the link between the academia and the industry, with special regard to the involvement of SMEs in technology transfer activities. The transnational network of these centres facilitate the involvement of international experts at any stage on the one hand; on the other hand they represent regional hosts for common projects in the field of innovation and technology transfer. Nine steps11 identified by Steinbeis during the pilot phase of setting up DTCs helps to overcome usual barriers to technology transfer and difficulties in sustainability of such services. These steps include preliminary analyses, elaboration of a business plan and the management structure of the DTC, as well as its growth strategy; last but not least, training of DTC staff is regarded also a key element. So far the establishment of DTCs is in progress in Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Croatia and Bulgaria.

Although the Centre is rather business-oriented, the institution regularly plays a consultant role to the

government sector, and also strongly connected with universities and research institutions in almost

every country of the Danube Region. Steinbeis has a leading role generating transnational projects

within the Region, organizing conferences, connecting and supporting SMEs.


Viadonau

Viadonau was established in 2005 by the Austrian Federal Ministry for Transport, Innovation and

Technology (BMVIT) as a limited company charged with the preservation and development of the

Danube waterway. The company is active in the field of environmentally responsible development and

advancement of the Danube waterway, transport and navigation, cooperating in both national and

international projects. To ensure its aims, Viadonau cooperates with political, business and science

sector, and also with environmental organisations and waterway authorities of other countries along

the Danube.

Viadonau has been deeply involved in preparing and implementing a number of projects on the above mentioned topics. Outcomes of these projects serves important inputs for the EUSDR and research activities in the related fields, such as

- environmentally friendly fleet modernisation: project MoVe IT! has carried out a cost-benefit analysis for the refitting of cargo vessels,

- online fairway information portal (FIS Portal) and master plan for the maintenance of the Danube waterway: NEWADA and NEWADA duo projects by developing common minimum standards of quality for the infrastructure of the Danube waterway,

- ship waste management: the project DORIS effectuated the establishment of waste disposal points for 'household waste' generated by cargo vessels,

- electronic recording of the position of all ships: DoRIS - Danube River Information Services, co-developed by viadonau, has played a determining role in the modernisation of inland navigation and has made a significant contribution to the improvement of safety on the Danube.


Danube Area Interregional Group at the Committee of the Regions

The Group was established in 2009. The main goals of the initiative are to (1) promote a common

identity for the Danube Region to affirm the Region’s full potential, (2) to work towards creating

11 For further information see: https://danube-inco.net/object/document/15353/attach/D5-8_Concept_Tool-kit_DTC_final.pdf



https://danube-inco.net/object/document/15353/attach/D5-8_Concept_Tool-kit_DTC_final.pdf

https://danube-inco.net/object/document/15353/attach/D5-8_Concept_Tool-kit_DTC_final.pdf


36

synergies, (3) to raise the Region’s profile at national, regional and European levels, and (4) to set up a

Danube platform to facilitate the exchange of views, ideas and practices between CoR members and

representatives of European institutions as well as non EU- countries along the Danube.


3.2 Regional and/or transnational stakeholders

3.2.1 Networks

The Regional Network for Central and South Eastern Europe of ICA (CASEE)

CASEE is a regional network related to various science disciplines (agriculture, food, biotechnology,

natural resources, nanotechnology, manufacturing, energy, transport, climate change, social sciences

and humanities, space, rural development and the environment), founded in 2010. The organisation

aims to stimulate and support its member institutions in the development of a European dimension in

education and research through the development of concerted actions and in engaging globally.

The PA flagship DREAM project, the International Joint Degree Master Programme “Sustainability in Agriculture, Food Production and Food Technology in the Danube Region” (Danube AgriFood), and several types of summer schools are the most relevant outcomes of the past years.

The main target areas in 2014-2020 will be the following:

- to support the development and implementation of the EU Strategy for the Danube Region,

- to strengthen research, education and university development in the Region,

- to develop joint research, educational and other projects (e.g. joint curricula, joint continuous

educational offers, structural development, human resource development, know-how

transfer, e.g. via an e-platform).

The funding source of the initiative is covered from membership fees. CASEE funds multilateral

programmes for educational and research projects providing a kind of “seed money” for initiating

larger projects. € 10,000 is the yearly budget of the CASEE Fund for Incentives Programme, out of which

an individual project usually received maximum€ 5,000.

Danube Rectors’ Conference, Joint Research Centre (JRC), and the Austrian Co-ordination Committee

for EUSDR are the most relevant stakeholders with which CASEE cooperates.


3.2.2 Committees, councils with the status of international organization

Black Sea Economic Cooperation (BSEC)

BSEC is an international organization established in 1992. It is a multilateral political and economic

initiative aimed at fostering interaction and harmony among its Member States, as well as to ensure

peace, stability and prosperity encouraging friendly and good neighbourly relations in the Black Sea

region. Research, innovation and education are important and relevant targeted areas of the initiative.

They fund multilateral programmes for member countries through the Project Development Fund

(PDF) and BSEC Hellenic Development Fund (BSEC-HDF), such as R&D, innovation projects, mobility,




37

career development programmes, networking events (workshops, conferences) and joint use of R&D

facilities/joint laboratories.

Each Member State volunteers in contributing to PDF. A PDF grant is up to € 30,000 / project covering the pre-feasibility study of the proposed project ideas which shall seek additional financial sources for the implementation phase. Between 2003 and 2012 twenty four projects were funded from the PDF in the fields of agriculture and agroindustry, education, energy, environmental protection, ICT, health and pharmaceutics, science and technology, SMEs.

BSEC-HDF was set up in 2008 based on the voluntary contribution from the Hellenic Republic which is a flexible mechanism targeting a set of key areas of regional cooperation, such as small scale infrastructure projects, networks and capacity building that promote innovation and regional development in the field of transport, renewable energy sources, environmental protection, business cooperation and trade facilitation, tourism, as well as culture. BSEC-HDF provides grants at least € 50,000 out of the average project budget of € 62,500-80,000.

BSEC has an important network of regional stakeholders; among others they are working and

cooperating with the Parliamentary Assembly of the Black Sea Economic Cooperation (PABSEC), Black

Sea Trade and Development Bank (BSTDB), and International Centre for Black Sea Studies (ICBSS).


Regional Cooperation Council (RCC)

The Regional Cooperation Council is an international organization founded in 2008 by the ministers of

the South-East European Cooperation Process (SEECP) as a successor of the Stability Pact for South

Eastern Europe aiming to launch a more “regionally owned” initiative. RCC promotes mutual

cooperation and European and Euro-Atlantic integration of South-East Europe in order to inspire

development in the region to benefit its people. The main tasks of the RCC are to represent the region,

assist the SEECP, monitor regional activities, exert leadership in regional cooperation, and provide a

regional perspective in donor assistance. Its key role is to generate and coordinate developmental

projects of a wider, regional character and create an appropriate political climate susceptible to their

implementation. The organization targets, among others, the fields of research, innovation and

education along with regional cooperation. It focuses on several scientific fields such as ICT, security,

transport, energy, environment, climate change, social sciences and humanities.

The South East Europe 2020 Strategy (SEE 2020) – which is entirely in line with the EU2020, as well as partly overlapping with the priorities of EUSDR – aims at promoting the creation of jobs and prosperity in a European perspective for the Western Balkans. The SEE 2020 with a focus on Integrated, Smart, Sustainable and Inclusive Growth, as well as on the Governance for Growth, aims to provide a framework for the socioeconomic policies of its member countries in developing their economies, achieving the goals relating to the accession, etc.

Consequently, RCC invests in the following fields: (1) Trade and investment integration; (2) Regional

cooperation in education; (3) Research and innovation, including the establishment of the Regional

Research Platform; (4) Culture and creative sectors (e.g. Continuation of Ljubljana Process,

Establishment of the SEE Museums Network); (5) Digital society development; (6) Contribution to the

development of sustainable and integrated transport in the region; (7) Strengthening regional

environmental and climate change cooperation; and (8) Competitiveness and Social development.

Research and innovation related actions will be implemented by the Western Balkans Research and



38

Innovation Strategy Exercise (WISE) Facility which aims to promote policy stability and continuity of

reform in the Western Balkans’ research and innovation sector aiming to improve the quality of public

spending on R&I.


Southeast European Cooperative Initiative (SECI)

Southeast European Cooperative Initiative is an international organisation established in 1996. SECI

member countries are Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Greece, Hungary,

Macedonia, Moldova, Montenegro, Romania, Serbia, Slovenia, and Turkey. Its objective is to eliminate

administrative and other obstacles with a view to increase efficiency in the flow of goods and improved

trade, identification of bottlenecks at main international traffic corridors, creation of networks and

zones of energy efficiency, investing in the promotion of networks of pipelines and their connections

with the international pipelines, provision of funds for the promotion of entrepreneurship, primarily

through projects of SMEs, etc. Environment and climate change are special scientific areas of the

initiative. The organization funds multilateral programmes and they cooperate with United Nations

Economic Commission for Europe (UN ECE), Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe

Secretariat (OSCE), and other regional initiatives.

SECI is open to multilateral cooperation with governments and other stakeholder groups since it serves as a bridge between the different involved parties from the region as much as outside the region, all with the view of finding sustainable and long term solutions for better integration.


3.2.3 Organizations with an intergovernmental feature

Central European Initiative (CEI)

CEI is a regional intergovernmental organization established in 1989 with the aim to support CEI

Member States on their path towards European integration, to promote their alignment to EU

standards, to implement small and medium-sized projects, and to open to convert constructive ideas

into innovative results.

The CEI is actively engaged in supporting projects in various areas of cooperation, also through the

mobilisation of financial resources providing greater possibilities for studying, financing and executing

national and international projects. Research, innovation, education, cooperation and integration are

the main areas to be supported by CEI. The special scientific areas targeted by the initiative are the

following: ICT, biotechnology, food, agriculture, energy, transport, environment, climate change, social

sciences and humanities.

By participating in EU Projects, CEI is able to achieve tangible results and to enlarge its cooperation networks. 18 projects have been implemented since 2004 with a total fund mobilisation of €21.2 million. Its long-standing activity in the promotion of regional cooperation and networks in Central, Eastern and South-Eastern Europe represent an added value for the construction of project partnerships and for the elaboration of concepts and constructive ideas to be transformed into innovative EU project applications.




39

According to the Action Plan 2014-2016 CEI’s target areas in 2014-2020 could be summarised through

the following points:

1) Towards a knowledge based society (research, innovation, education, information society),

2) Towards a sustainable economy and development (transport, logistics, energy efficiency,

renewable energy, climate, environment, business development),

3) Towards an inclusive society (intercultural society, media, civil society).

The CEI Cooperation Fund is financed by annual contributions from all Member States, which supports a large number of small and medium-sized projects, such as seminars, workshops, conferences, training courses, fostering mobility and people-to-people contacts in the CEI region. Through these Cooperation Activities, the intra-CEI mobility rate has grown to an average of 5,000 people every year. Since its inception in 2002, 857 activities have been co-financed with around €8 million and having an overall value of about €52 million. The CEI Fund at the EBRD, which has significantly contributed to strengthening CEI’s project-oriented dimension, is active since 1992. The Fund based on the sole contribution of Italy as of €38.5 million, mainly provides grant-type assistance for specific components of Technical Cooperation (TC) projects. Since its inception, the Fund has provided more than €23 million for funding more than 120 TC projects mobilising €4.8 billion of international investments in the countries of operations. The CEI Fund has also contributed a total of more than €2.1 million to the Know-How Exchange Programme (KEP) supporting around 70 projects facilitating the transfer of experience from organisations in the EU to peers in the non-EU countries within the CEI region. Since 2008, the KEP has also been financed by Austria. 22 projects, for an overall value of about €1.2 million, have been supported with €550,000 in the period 2008-2013.

Under this initiative, the CEI Network of Focal Points consists of representatives from ministries and

other governmental institutions from all CEI Member States. The Focal Points are regularly invited to

evaluate, gather, propose and execute CEI activities as well as to assist in the definition of the strategies

in the CEI Plan of Action. The target areas in 2014-2020 are as follows:

- Bridging gaps between countries within and outside the European Research Area (ERA).

- Promoting cooperation along the lines of the Triple Helix Model for innovation (science,

academia and entrepreneurship).

- Facilitating access to the institutions of the CEI Science and Technology Network.

The Central European Initiative (CEI) strongly supports transnational mobility of scientists and researchers across its area, for example by the Research Fellowship Programme – CERES. Building upon the growing demand for scientific cooperation stemming from its Member States, CEI decided to strengthen its Research Fellowship Programme by merging its own resources with those provided by the European Commission through the Seventh Framework Programme (FP7) - Marie Curie Actions. The synergy between the Community action and the regional impact of the CEI, as well as the financial resources made available by 5 partner institutions (International Centre for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology - ICGEB, International Centre for Theoretical Physics ABDUS SALAM - ICTP, International School for Advanced Studies - SISSA, Synchrotron ELETTRA, Cluster in Biomedicine - CBM), has provided the right framework for strengthening the CEI Research Fellowship Programme, of which CERES represents the natural evolution.

The CEI University Network (CEI UniNet) was established in 2004 to enhance cooperation among

universities and other institutions of higher education in Central, Eastern and South Eastern Europe at

post-graduate level. This is done through the mobility of students and teaching staff at postgraduate

level. Mobility is promoted through the implementation of Joint Programmes such as PhD and Master’s


40

courses, financed through annual calls for proposals. Summer schools, seminars and workshops may

also be supported provided that they envisage a teaching element, a minimum duration of one week

and an awarding certificate.

Since 2004, more than 80 projects (PhD and Master’s courses, summer schools and seminars) have been co-financed with a total allocation of around €1 million provided by Italy for more than 1000 beneficiaries (students, researchers, professors) with a fund mobilisation of around €7 million.


Steering Platform on Research for the Western Balkan Countries

The network was established in 2006 with the goal of supporting the enhanced integration of the

Western Balkan Countries (WBCs) in the European Research Area. Senior Officials from the WBC,

interested EU Member States and the European Commission meet regularly to discuss the current

issues in RTDI in the WBC, issues related to the adoption of the acquis, cooperation possibilities and

good practices. Research and innovation are the targeted fields of the network.

The layout of the Steering Platform (SP) meetings can be taken as a transferable good practice: it has been applied to other areas e.g. RTDI dialogues in the Eastern Partnership region. Additionally, the MIRRIS consortium12 also used the experiences for a broader stakeholder dialogue in EU13.

The Steering Platform is open to many stakeholders (SEE-ERA.NET PLUS, WBC-INCO.NET projects, RCC,

European Cooperation in Science and Technology (COST), EUREKA, CEI, UNESCO, European Bank for

Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), EUSDR PACs, etc.) whose representatives are regularly

invited to the SP meetings. The formulation and adoption of conclusions is carried out during the

meetings. They highlight synergies, define and coordinate joint activities with other programmes /

initiatives and rely also on the follow-up of those.


Salzburg Forum

The Salzburg Forum was established in 2000. Its Member States are Austria, Bulgaria, Croatia, the

Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia. The Salzburg Forum provides a

platform for the discussion of political, strategic and operational issues with a view to coordinating and

steadily enhancing cooperation amongst Central European national authorities in the area of internal

security. Operational cooperation and lobbying are the main targeted fields of the initiative with a

special focus on security. They fund multilateral programmes. Cooperation within the Salzburg Forum

is based on a threefold approach, strengthening operational cooperation in Central Europe, joint

lobbying for EU policy-making, implementation of a joint external strategy of the Salzburg Forum.

The strongly coordinated, well-functioning and active cooperation between Member States at the Council meetings can be considered as a good practice of the Salzburg Forum, as it can be a “pressure group” within the Council, having an influence on decision-making processes.


12 MIRRIS is a project funded under FP7, see http://www.mirris.eu/SitePages/default.aspx




http://www.mirris.eu/SitePages/default.aspx


41

Visegrad 4 Cooperation (V4)

The Visegrad 4 Cooperation is an inter-governmental organisation established in 1991 with the

purpose to promote cultural cohesion, to enhance the imparting of values in the field of culture,

education, science and exchange of information of the member states; the Czech Republic, Hungary,

Poland and Slovakia. The Visegrad 4 cooperates with other regional bodies, as well as with single

countries in the region and beyond on an ad-hoc or regular basis. Germany, Ukraine, Austria, Romania

can be mentioned among them. While the Benelux countries and countries of the Nordic Council of

Ministers can be considered as model for V4, countries within the EU’s Eastern Partnership and the

Western Balkans can be regarded as regions targeted by V4 activities. The Visegrad Group generally

strives for the representation of interests of its members within the EU.

Important successes during the negations of the 2014-2020 Multiannual Financial Frameworks shall be highlighted as transferable good practices since V4 managed to set up a strong coalition among those EU Member States which joined the EU since 2004 to preserve the role and budget of Cohesion Policy. Additionally, V4 Countries with Romania and Bulgaria (V4+2) are planning to prepare a common spatial development strategy which promotes the more harmonious and efficient spatial development of this region and is suitable to establish the basis of a common platform to influence dominant processes of the European Union.




42

3.2.4 Agencies, funds at transnational level

Visegrad Fund

The Visegrad Fund was founded in 2000 as a regional and cross-border programme. The purpose of

the Fund, as an autonomous entity (contrary to the funds maintained by CEI or BSEC), is to facilitate

and promote the development of closer cooperation among V4 countries (and of V4 countries with

other countries, especially but not exclusively non-EU member states in Eastern Europe, the Western

Balkans and the South Caucasus) through grant support of common cultural, scientific and educational

projects, youth exchanges, cross-border projects and tourism promotion, and through individual

mobility programs (scholarships, residencies). The fund targets mainly research, innovation, education,

culture, cooperation and external policy, with emphasis on security and social sciences.

Most of the grant recipients are non-governmental organizations, municipalities and local governments, universities, schools, as well as other public institutions and individual citizens. By the end of 2013, the fund has supported nearly 3,800 grant projects and awarded over 1,700 scholarships and artist residencies in total worth of nearly €54 million. The size of grants varies between €6,000 and €45,000, depending on the grant program. The share of the grant in the project budget is between 80 and 100 percent.

Figure 5: Countries covered by CEEPUS and the Visegrad Fund (edited by RCISD)


Central European Exchange Programme for University Studies (CEEPUS)



43

CEEPUS is an international organisation established in 1993, with the main goal of organising university

networks and operating joint programs (i.e. Joint Degrees and Joint Doctoral Programs). CEEPUS also

covers mobility grants for students and teachers. The funding of CEEPUS comes from national

contributions. Several colleges/universities are participating in the programme from its Member

States, namely from Albania, Austria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, the Czech Republic,

Hungary, Macedonia, Moldova, Montenegro, Poland, Romania, Serbia, the Slovak Republic, Slovenia

and Pristine/Kosovo. The currently running programme is called CEEPUS III (2013-2015) which aims to

stimulate academic mobility in the frame of individual university networks, to promote university

cooperation in Central and South-eastern Europe, and to develop joint programmes resulting in joint

or double degrees.

Several good practices effectuated by CEEPUS could be highlighted such as the volume and outcomes of exchange programmes (in 2015/16 72 networks with approx. 1100 participating units are in operation, for 2016/17 100 networks with approx. 1400 units have applied; in 2014/15 a total of 3945 mobility applications with a total 5095 scholarship months were awarded), reinforced networks, pilot projects and joint applications, coordination of projects, and its current aim to simplify the application systems and enhance its uniformity. A recent study has shown that CEEPUS is an important career factor for teachers from the region; and although this was not an explicit objective of the study findings indicated that CEEPUS tended to keep them in the region.


Western Balkans Research and Innovation Strategy Exercise (WISE) Centre

WISE is planned to be a regional centre with the status of an international organization, developed by

WBCs, the European Union, the World Bank and OECD to facilitate the implementation of the Western

Balkans Regional R&D Strategy for Innovation programme being the RI branch of the SEE 2020 (see

RCC). The objective of WISE is to promote policy stability and continuity of reform in the Western

Balkans’ research and innovation sector. This sector wide approach is supposed to help improving the

quality of public expenditures on RI and thereby to increase the sector’s contribution to economic

growth and job creation. The WISE Center shall provide a platform for the coordination, monitoring,

and evaluation of donors’ support to research and innovation in the region including serving as a

“technical secretariat” for the discussions under the R&I pillar of the SEE 2020.

In the future, WISE will manage the implementation of four main programmes formulated by the WB

Regional R&D Strategy for Innovation, namely (1) the Research Excellence Fund (with an estimated

budget of €55 million); (2) Networks of Excellence (with an estimated budget of €55 million); (3)

Technology Transfer Program (with an estimated budget of €40 million); (4) Early-Stage Start-Up

Program (with an estimated budget of €40 million) to nurture growth in technology-based start-ups in

coordination with national initiatives and serve as a pipeline to the Western Balkans’ Enterprise

Innovation Fund, other Western Balkans Enterprise Development and Innovation Facility (WB EDIF)

initiatives, and regional investors interested in later-stage financing. The centre will also accompany

the work of the Strategy for the Danube Region and Strategy for the Adriatic and Ionian Region as well

as be designated as an international organisation.





44

Western Balkans Enterprise Development and Innovation Facility (WB EDIF)

The WB EDIF is an innovative financial instrument funded predominantly by the European Union with

the aim of benefiting small and medium-sized enterprises in the Western Balkans. WB EDIF is

comprised of four different pillars: the Enterprise Innovation Fund (ENIF), which is an early-stage fund

offering equity or quasi-equity finance to SMEs; the Enterprise Expansion Fund (ENEF), which is a late-

stage fund supporting established SMEs with high growth potential; the Guarantee Facility (GF) which

incentivises banks by providing guarantees to build up new SME loan portfolios; and the Advisory &

Support, which offer governments support in implementing policy reforms regarding the regulatory

environment for SMEs.

The initiative’s objectives include improving venture capital ecosystem and access to finance, enabling

integration with EU policy, supporting innovation, and therefore promoting the visibility of the region

as a market player. The platform’s actions also aim the reform of the regulatory, legal basis in the

region to ensure the success of the initiative’s activities.

The ENIF will provide access to €38.5 million for innovative SMEs in start-up to early expansion phases, while the budget of ENEF is approximately €48.5 million.

In its first round of financing of the Guarantee Facility, with a budget of €20 million, the EIF signed 6 Guarantee Facility Agreements with various banks across the region, thereby leveraging this original amount to over €110m of SME lending. A second round of funding will allow the EIF to re-launch a Call for Expression of interest whereby an additional budget of €90 million.

The WBEDIF platform actively contributes to the deepening of regional cooperation with more than 1500 supported SMEs. The platform has brought together public and private investors to improve the region.

As a platform, WB EDIF involves various partners and investors from the public and private sector. The

EU, the EIF, the European Investment Bank (EIB), the World Bank, the OECD, the European Bank for

Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), the Development Bank of Austria (OeEB), the KfW Group

and several other banks. Notably the WB EDIF platform also involves the participation and investment

from the beneficiary economies, being Albania, Bosnia-Hercegovina, Croatia, former Yugoslav Republic

of Macedonia, Kosovo*13, Montenegro and Serbia.


3.2.5 Other types of initiatives/stakeholders

Southeast Europe Investment Committee (SEEIC)

SEEIC was established in 2007. The main goal of the committee is to create a high-level decision-making

and to be a coordination body with a goal and mandate to initiate and support the reform and

implementation of policies promoting foreign and domestic investments in the South East Europe

Region. SEEIC currently has three main objectives: (1) development of the related parts of South East

Europe 2020 Strategy (see RCC) jointly with the SEE countries; (2) increasing competitiveness and

enhancing regional value chains; (3) promoting the SEE region as an attractive investment destination.

13 This designation is without prejudice to positions on status, and is in line with UNSCR 1244/1999 and the ICJ Opinion on the Kosovo declaration of independence



45

Research, innovation and education are also targeted fields of the initiative. SEEIC cooperates with

different stakeholders in the Region, such as RCC, OECD, Central European Free Trade Agreement

(CEFTA) Secretariat, South East European Centre for Entrepreneurial Learning (SEECEL) and Exchange-

Traded Fund (ETF).


Vienna Economic Forum (VEF)

The Vienna Economic Forum was established in 2004 with the aim of popularising and promoting

investment opportunities in the region from the Adriatic to the Black Sea, and promoting economic

cooperation. Between 2014 and 2020 the Vienna Economic Forum plans to develop close bonds in the

region, not just in the political sphere but in economy, energy, environment and climate change.

The New Europe Bridge (Danube Bridge 2) between Romania and Bulgaria could be mentioned as a good practice, one of the tangible achievements of the Danube Strategy since it literally connects the regions. VEF was actively lobbying and gave political support for the New Europe Bridge.

Vienna Economic Forum has good and fruitful cooperation network in the Danube Region. Their most

relevant partners are: Bled Strategic Forum; Business Advisory Council for Southeast Europe and

Eurasia (BACSEE), Thessaloniki; CEI; Diplomatic Academy of Vienna, Vienna; European Center for

Environmental Economy, Sofia; Hayek Institute, Vienna; Institute for the Danube and Central Europe

(IDM), Vienna; Visegrad Group, and other international financial institutions, e.g. the European

Investment Bank and the European Bank of Reconstruction and Development.


Central European Service for Cross-border Initiatives (CESCI)

The Central European Service for Cross-border Initiatives (CESCI) is a think-tank for cross-border issues

focusing mainly on Central and Southeast Europe. The initiative provides professional support for the

stakeholders involved in territorial cooperation. Professional support includes organizing conferences,

workshops, building networks and helping their activity, or representing the expectations of the EU to

the local level.

CESCI actively supported the foundation of 11 European Grouping for Territorial Cooperation (EGTC) which are non-profit groupings recognized by local governments and the EU as well. CESCI helps the activities of EGTCs by providing EGTC managers exchange of information and good practices. CESCI founded the Budapest Platform with French, Dutch and Portuguese partners, which aims to establish a professional supporting network on European level. The initiative is also active in the field of research. Their project titled ‘Crossing the borders’ contributes to the roadmap of the EUSDR’s Priority Area 10 (Development of institutional capacity and cooperation).

Following the scope of activities of the initiative, CESCI cooperates with a wide range of stakeholders

in the Region. The actions mainly target the central and local governments but there is close

cooperation with various universities by supporting research activities and project development. There

is cooperation with other programmes and initiatives as well, such as the ALpe Adria Danube INitiative

(ALADIN).




46


Institute for the Danube Region and Central Europe (IDM)

Through its research activities, the Institute for the Danube Region and Central Europe (Institute für

den Donauraum und Mitteleuropa (IDM)) aims to enhance knowledge about the Danube Region and

Central and Southeast Europe as well as to improve neighbouring relations, ensure better

understanding. Improving scientific cooperation and collaboration of universities are also of high

importance.

IDM holds close cooperation with various governments (e.g. Slovenian, Czech), with the Austrian public

authorities. IDM has close connections with several universities. The institution also cooperates with

other relevant stakeholders from various countries of the region e.g. Germany, Serbia, Romania, etc.

The greatest results of IDM’s activities are connections which have been created. Based on its

experiences, enhancing cooperation in research and especially in education is of great importance to

strengthen existing synergies in the Danube region.


3.3 European Union

3.3.1 European Transnational Cooperation Programmes (ETCs)

The European Territorial Cooperation programmes, especially the transnational ones relevant for the

Danube Region were examined, including Central Europe (2007-13 and 2014-20), Southeast Europe

(2007-13) and the Danube Region (2014-2020) ETCs. These programmes, though not exclusively but

do focus on research and innovation to a certain extent and are open to public entities, such as

universities and research institutes, and, in the new funding period, also to companies. Other ETC

programmes were not considered relevant for the investigation due to the fact that research,

innovation or education represent only a small share of the funded projects (such as Cross-Border

Cooperation programmes, CBCs) or funded projects shall have an interregional feature (INTERREG

including URBACT).

Central Europe (CE) Transnational Cooperation Programme

Central Europe (CE) is a European Union programme founded in 2007, financed by the European

Regional Development Fund (ERDF). The main objectives of this programme is to facilitate innovation,

improve accessibility, promote responsible environment using and to enhance competitiveness and

attractiveness in nine central European countries, including Austria, Czech Republic, Germany,

Hungary, Italy, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia and Ukraine (see Figure 6).




47

Figure 6: Territorial coverage of Central Europe ETC (source: central2013.eu)

The Central Europe 2020 (launched in the 2014-2020 period) supports further development in the

fields of innovation, low-carbon economy, environment, culture and transport. These fields include

the followings issues: linkage improvement among actors of the innovation, improvement of skills and

entrepreneurial competences for economic and social innovation, development and implementation

solutions for energy efficiency and renewable energy usage, improvement of territorial based low-

carbon energy strategies and policies, improvement of mobility planning in urban areas, lowering CO2

emissions, improvement of environmental management capacities for the protection of natural

heritage and resources, improvement of capacities for the use of cultural heritage and resources,

environmental management improvement urban areas, improved planning and coordination of

passenger transport systems, improved coordination among freight transport stakeholders for

environmentally-friendly freight solution. The programme is open for SMEs, research institutes,

institutions of higher education, policy makers, local governments and authorities. Three or four call

for applications are expected to be published in the current programming period.

Southeast Europe (SEE) Transnational Cooperation Programme

Southeast Europe (SEE) was a transnational integration and cooperation programme of the European

Union, founded in 1996. The main goal of the programme was facilitating innovation, and the further

improvement of environment, accessibility and growth areas in Southeast Europe, including Albania,

Austria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia,

Greece, Hungary, Italy (some regions), Republic of Moldova, Montenegro, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia,

Slovenia, and some regions of Ukraine (see Figure 7). The funding of the programme was twofold: it

was mainly funded by the EU (75-85%), but in-kind contribution of applicants was necessary beside

the national contribution (if available).


48

Figure 7: Territorial coverage by SEE ETC and one of its successors, the Danube Transnational Cooperation Programme (Danube ETC) (edited by RCISD)

In 2014 three new programmes have been launched as successors of SEE: Adriatic Ionian 2014-2020,

focusing on research, environment, transport and governance in 4 EU countries (Greece, Italy and

Slovenia, and Croatia) and in 4 non-EU countries (Albania, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Montenegro, Serbia)

of the Adriatic-Ionian Region; Balkan-Mediterranean 2014-2020, focusing on economic, social,

environmental and institutional cohesion and development in Albania, Bulgaria, Cyprus, the Former

Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Greece; and Danube Transnational 2014-2020, focusing on

innovative and socially responsibility, environment and culture responsibility, better connected and

energy responsibility and a well-governed Danube Region.

Danube Transnational Cooperation Programme (Danube TP)

The Danube TP is launched in the 2014-2020 funding period by the European Union, as one of the

successor of the Southeast Europe Transnational Cooperation Programme. The programme aims to

improve research and innovation in the countries of: Germany, Czech Republic, Austria, Slovakia,

Slovenia, Hungary, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Montenegro, Serbia, Romania, Republic of

Moldova, Ukraine and Bulgaria (see Figure 7). Potential applicants of the proposals are institutions of

higher education, research institutions, SMEs, policy makers and local governments. Main target areas

include the improvement of transport and environment, although the programme invests ample

resources in fostering eco-innovation, knowledge transfer, cluster policy, social innovation and skilled

entrepreneurship including technological and non-technological aspects, disaster prevention,

environment preservation, TEN-T network, environment friendly transport, regional energy planning,

multi-level and transnational governance, improved EUSDR. The total estimated budget of the

programme would reach €269 million, although a minimum of 15% contribution consisting of national


49

and private funding is needed. Three or four call for applications are expected to be published in the

current programming period.

3.3.2 Joint Programming Initiatives (JPIs)

The European Commission is encouraging Member States to work together on research into a range

of topics that pose a challenge to European citizens now and in the years ahead, because European

researchers can achieve more results and make better use of public funds through research

cooperation and RDI programming coordination than by working separately. Joint Programming

Initiatives are inter-governmental collaborations meant to tackle major societal challenges unable to

be addressed by individual countries and in doing so contribute to the development of the European

Research Area. Member States and Associated Countries participate in joint initiatives on a voluntary

basis in order to increase the value of relevant national and European R&D funding through joint

planning, implementation and evaluation of national research programmes. Regarding the topics

covered by EUSDR, WATER JPI is supposed to be examined in this current paper.

Joint Programming Initiative Water challenges for a changing world (Water JPI)

The Joint Programming Initiative “Water challenges for a changing world” is an inter-governmental

collaboration with the ambition to achieve sustainable water systems for a sustainable economy in

Europe and abroad. The initiative deals with research in the field of water and hydrological sciences.

Public research and innovation activities are funded by the European countries and the European

Commission with an estimated amount of €500 million each year. The Water JPI counts on 21 partners,

including 20 countries and the EC, and has 4 observer countries. Calls are published on a yearly basis.

As it is demonstrated on the picture below, the Danube Region countries are only partly represented

in the Water JPI (Figure 8).


50

Figure 8: Partners and observer countries of Water JPI (source: www.waterjpi.eu)


3.3.3 Knowledge Innovation Communities (KICs)

Initiated by the European Institute for Technology and Innovation (EIT) to promote innovation in

Europe, Knowledge Innovation Communities brings together leading players from all these dimensions

to cooperate within the KICs. KICs, operating as companies, carry out a whole range of activities,

covering the entire innovation chain – including training and education programmes, reinforcing the

journey from research to the market, innovation projects and business incubators. KICs have been

conceived so that they are able to react in an effective and flexible way to new challenges and changing

environments.

The KICs are driven by a pursuit of excellence in all of their activities and are established with the aim

of reaching the necessary critical mass to achieve systemic impact, including the creation of new

businesses and new jobs, and the promotion of new skills and entrepreneurial talent in the economy.

From the view of the Danube Strategy, two KICs, KIC InnoEnergy and Climate KIC is considered relevant

in this investigation.

KIC InnoEnergy

The company was established in 2010 with the aim to achieve a sustainable energy future for Europe

with promoting innovation, entrepreneurship and education in the field of sustainable energy. Its



51

mission is to build a sustainable long-lasting operational framework amongst the three actors of

knowledge triangle in the energy sector: industry, research and higher education. The company has a

wide range of cooperating partners, its community includes more than 160 associate and project

partners. As it is demonstrated on the map below (Figure 9), only a few institutes from the Danube

Region are involved in the activities of KIC InnoEnergy, such as Steinbeis Europa Centrum, University

of Stuttgart from Germany, Bay Zoltán Nonprofit Ltd. from Hungary as formal partners.

Figure 9: Kic InnoEnergy activities throughout Europe (source: www.kic-innoenergy.com)


Climate-KIC

Climate-KIC is a public-private innovation partnership focused on climate change, consisting of

companies, academic institutions and the public sector. The mission of Climate-KIC is to create

sustainable growth by addressing climate change mitigation and adaption. Climate-KIC is active in four

climate change themes: urban transitions; sustainable production systems; decision metrics & finance;

sustainable land use. With integrating the three sectors, Climate-KIC transforms knowledge and ideas

into economically viable products or services that help to mitigate climate change. Having the main

centres of the Climate-KIC beyond the Danube Region (UK, Germany, Switzerland, France, the

Netherlands, and in Denmark), there are two Regional Implementation Centres within DR (Germany

and Hungary) and two centres for outreach regions (Croatia and Romania).



52


3.3.4 Networks at EU level

As it has been previously pointed out in the section 2 Methodology, certain networks or organizations

having a strictly European or international character (i.e. UNESCO, EURADA, Eurochambers, etc.) and

not having special focus on the region or the countries covered by the Danube Strategy became also

subject to the investigation. However, it was considered important to check whether they respond by

any means to the priorities of the Strategy or whether they have such plans for the near future.

EUREKA

EUREKA is an intergovernmental network involving more than 40 countries. The aim of the

organization is to enhance European competitiveness by fostering innovation-driven entrepreneurship

in Europe between small and large industry, research institutions and universities, and also to boost

national economies on the international market and to strengthen the basis for sustainable prosperity

and employment in Europe. The organization serves as a platform for international cooperation in the

field of innovation. EUREKA supports the transformation of innovative ideas into products, processes

and services, and also supports the internationalisation of businesses with innovative ideas.

Supported research projects are generally the result of bottom-up initiatives; participating researchers

decide on the scope and targeted fields of activities. The granted label EUREKA provides guarantee for

the quality, well-established nature and marketability of projects.

There is no set funding frame for EUREKA – costs of research projects shall be secured by own

resources unless member states dedicate a certain amount of funding on an annual or call basis.

The EUREKA Danube call 2015 can be considered as a success story of the Danube-INCO.NET project with the involvement of most DR countries (Austria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Germany, Hungary, Montenegro, Romania, Serbia, and Slovak Republic (SK). A high number of proposals were submitted (80) by more than 300 different participants, such as industry (17), SME (172), universities (71) demonstrating the well-connected nature of the Region. Despite of this great success mismatch between funding agencies hindered the successful start of supported projects: some funding agencies could not align the funding smoothly. Nevertheless, further calls are planned in the upcoming years dedicated for the DR.


European Cluster Alliance (ECA)

The European Cluster Alliance was established in 2006 with the aim of bringing together political and

administrative policy makers, development of trans-regional programmes for innovation and cluster

activities, establish close links with existing and planned European innovation programmes within the

framework of the PRO INNO Europe initiative and the European Cluster Alliance.

In the recent years, ECA delivered a detailed overview on cluster wide needs of CEE regions and

countries in regard to future strategic points of interest. ECA also facilitated the approval of CEE Cluster

Agreement commitment on common strategies and objectives for the future innovation and cluster

policy signed by politicians representing all CEE countries and regions in Brussels in 2007.




53

Several actions were taken to increase cross-border cooperation, i.e. the intensive involvement of the administrative governmental level through “speed-dating” in a 3-step workshop. Last but not least, ECA managed to draft a trans-regional Innovation Support Programme as well.


European University Association (EUA)

The European University Association is the largest European organization representing 850 member

universities across 47 countries in the European level. The organization aims to support individual

institutions and the higher education sector as a whole. Its main priorities are the internationalisation

of higher education, facilitating RI activities of universities, strengthening the governance, leadership

and management of institutions, improving the overall quality of higher education, and enhancing the

cooperation of universities and business sector. EUA provides unique networking possibility for

universities to improve cooperation and to establish dialogue with other organizations, institutions

within and beyond Europe.

The development of the Public Funding Observatory monitoring the impact of the economic crisis on public funding for universities in Europe is one of the achievements of the initiative. Several analysis reports were also published in this field.14

Despite being a European organization, EUA has an effect on regional cooperation and development

as well, as it is also active in the field of smart specialization. The organization also cooperates with the

Danube Rectors’ Conference, an important stakeholder in the Danube Region.


Enterprise Europe Network (EEN)

Enterprise Europe Network was officially launched by the European Union in 2008. The main goal of

the network is to support SMEs in exploiting opportunities provided by the common market of the EU

by bringing together almost 600 European business support organizations from 50 countries from the

EU, candidate countries and EFTA countries. The programme has ties not only with EU countries, but

with several non EU and regional leading countries. In all of these countries, the programme focuses

on institutions of higher education, research institutes, industries and SMEs.

The Enterprise Europe Network is a key instrument in the EU's strategy to boost growth and jobs. Bringing together around 600 business support organizations from more than 60 countries, it helps small companies seize the unparalleled business opportunities in the EU Single Market. With more than 3,000 experts, the client satisfaction rate of the Network is 85%. More than 13,000 SMEs per year benefit from technology audits and business reviews. Specialized, tailor-made support for high potential, innovative SMEs are also provided by EEN. Within the Network, the initiative CEENet7 tries to deepen the regional cooperation. This mini-project includes the colleagues of Hungary, Austria, Slovenia, Slovakia, The Czech Republic, Poland and Germany. The number of supported conferences and brokerage events within this initiative is about 7-8 per year.

14 The website of the Public Funding Observatory is avaible here: http://www.eua.be/activities-services/projects/eua-online-tools/public-funding-observatory-tool.aspx



http://www.eua.be/activities-services/projects/eua-online-tools/public-funding-observatory-tool.aspx

http://www.eua.be/activities-services/projects/eua-online-tools/public-funding-observatory-tool.aspx


54

Stakeholders of the programme include: European Technology Platforms, Europe INNOVA projects and

Business Innovation Centres (BICs), research-driven clusters and National Contact Points of EU

framework programmes. This cooperation aims to enhance not only the development of small

companies, but further increase the influx of technology and innovation at both EU and international

levels.


3.4 Stakeholders at international level

3.4.1 International Organizations and Agencies

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)

UNESCO is a specialized agency of the United Nations founded in 1945 with the main ideas of

mobilizing for education, building intercultural understanding, pursuing scientific cooperation,

protecting freedom of expression. The three main sectors of UNESCO are education, natural sciences

and culture, plus two other additional sectors: social and human sciences and communication and

information, however, there are many other intersectoral platforms as well. UNESCO has three main

divisions: World Water Assessment program, environmental science (e.g. one for biosphere reserves)

and science policy and capacity building. UNESCO is linked with national governments through the

National Commission, enhancing modality of work at UNESCO.

Since 2002, the UNESCO Office in Venice has been active in providing financial support and elaborating initiatives to generate regional networking as a means of mobilizing science, technology and innovation (STI) for peace and sustainable development. During this decade, acting as a neutral platform for dialogue and cooperation for policy-makers and academia of South East Europe, the Office has organized a number of high-level events pioneering initiatives in the sub-region, contributing to the elaboration of the national STI strategies of SEE countries (Bosnia and Herzegovina and Albania). The UNESCO Office in Venice has also provided financial support and devised schemes to encourage regional networking in life sciences, environmental sciences and astronomy, as a means of tackling brain drain, supporting communication services and strengthening scientific cooperation as a tool for reconciliation and dialogue. Networking was successfully implemented in the Balkan Region: science was used as a means to re-establish good relations between different states. UNESCO does not exclusively focus on developing research activities but it facilitates peaceful environment. Approximately 10 years ago, the SEE Network for Mathematical and Theoretical Physics has been launched. Currently it has 15 member countries of the region with nearly 300 participants.

One of the aims of UNESCO is to bridge the gap between science, policy and society. Science is regarded

as an instrument of social equity, inclusion and for the promotion of ethical principles and gender

equality. The UNESCO Venice in Office continues to develop initiatives contributing to ‘sustainability

science’’ and reflecting UNESCO’s mission and mandate throughout the SEE Region. Its science policy

programme is consisted of various services, such as

(1) Policy Advice to member states in STI policy formulation/review,

(2) Capacity-building in STI policies,

(3) International and regional cooperation in STI governance,



55

(4) Elaboration of tools for STI governance,

(5) Science legislation – strengthening links between science and parliaments,

(6) Promoting innovation – development of science parks, incubators, entrepreneurship

programmes,

(7) Popularizing science – science centres, museums, UNESCO prizes,

(8) Promoting gender equality in science.


OECD Regional Programme for Southeast Europe

The OECD actively supports South East Europe governments in their reform efforts to enhance

competitiveness and private sector development through its Regional Programme for SEE, through

both horizontal and sectoral measures. Comprehensive reform programmes are essential to reach a

competitive economy, therefore OECD provides support to national governments in writing such

reform programmes, assesses the state of economy and offers recommendations to prioritize

structural reforms. OECD is also active in the field of innovation, helping to frame innovation strategies

as well as frameworks for successful co-operation between academia, business, government and civil

society in Triple and Quadruple Helix settings.

A flagship publication named ‘Competitiveness in South East Europe – A Policy Outlook 2016’15 covers fifteen dimensions of policy which determine the competitiveness of the economy. It is a reference to guide policy makers in the region for priorities in structural reform.

In support of the transition to knowledge based economies, comprehensive innovation strategies were adopted by the governments of Croatia and Macedonia. In the FYR Macedonia, the implementation of the strategy is already advanced, and an innovation fund has been set up. Currently other projects are in progress, aiming to provide sustainable policy frameworks for academia-industry-government-civil society collaboration for innovation and social innovation, in Croatia, Albania and Kosovo.

The development of triple helix and quadruple helix strategies are also considered as success stories. Triple helix strategy was adopted e.g. in Bosnia Herzegovina, and quadruple helix strategy in Croatia. Successful Triple Helix and Quadruple Helix competitions have been set up in four countries of the region, demonstrating the relevance of those models in practical terms.

Another major outcome is the creation of SME policy index, with which various indicators are being measured to which degree countries are implementing small business acts.

The OECD regional programme is a close partner of the European Union, in direct support of the

Commission’s Enlargement policy, in order to prepare the economies of SEE to become functioning

market economies according to the Copenhagen criteria.

OECD has a broad level of networks in the region and is cooperating with various actors, including

national governments which are directly involved in the set-up and the execution of projects, including

all relevant stakeholders of the country (ministries, private sector representatives and academia). The

Investment Compact actively cooperates with about 15 regional organizations, such as the Regional

Cooperation Council (RCC), the CEFTA Secretariat, the Western Balkans Innovation Strategy Exercise

15 See http://www.oecd.org/publications/competitiveness-in-south-east-europe-9789264250529-en.htm


http://www.oecd.org/publications/competitiveness-in-south-east-europe-9789264250529-en.htm


56

(WISE), etc. International organizations are also cooperating partners, for instance the EBRD, the

European Investment Fund (EIF) etc.


3.4.2 Associations and other initiatives

Association of the European Chambers of Commerce and Industry (Eurochambers)

Eurochambers is an association founded in 1958, which strives to improve the general conditions in

which businesses operate, to facilitate access to markets within and beyond the EU and to ensure the

availability of human, financial and natural resources. It promotes innovation, lobbying and education

in most European countries. Eurochambers represents policy makers, industries and SMEs alongside

with the chambers of commerce in each member countries. The association also covers scientific areas,

like energy, environment, climate change, social sciences and humanities.


Association of Regional Development Agencies (EURADA)

The Association of Regional Development Agencies is an association serving as a platform, keeping its

members up to date with EU policy developments and provides briefing on critical issues such as state

aid rules. It also alerts members to funding and contract opportunities and helps with forming and

running partnerships. Apart from lobbying and briefing the European Commission on behalf of

members, it is also interested in research, innovation and education.

The association covers most European countries, including countries from the Danube Region: Austria,

Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Czech Republic, Italy, Romania, Serbia, and Slovakia. However, EURADA

cooperates only with a few stakeholders from the Danube Region, which are mainly from Romania and

Austria. EURADA is funded publicly at regional and EU level.

The support provided in the formulation of several Regional Innovation Strategies to find the link between research and innovation and to get funding for the academia-industry cooperation can be considered as one of the main achievements of EURADA in the past few years.


Academic Cooperation Association (ACA)

The Academic Cooperation Association is a pan-European network and think tank in the area of

international cooperation in higher education with the membership of 24 national organisations in 18

European countries. There are also associated members in North America, Mexico and Australia. The

main objective of ACA is the promotion of innovation and internationalisation of European higher

education while maintaining a global outreach. The main activities of the association are research and

analysis, evaluations, consultancy for private and public bodies, advocacy, publications etc. The

networking activity is also important; ACA enhances the cooperation between member organisations

and third parties.







57

4 Evaluation on the results of the initiatives identified from the point of view

of R&I policy dialogue

Results of the desk research, questionnaire and interviews

As a result of the desk research, questionnaire and interviews of the two rounds, quantitative and

qualitative data of 49 stakeholders were summarized. One part of these data describes the main

features of the initiatives analysed, thus, they can be found in section 2.2 “Methodology” and also in

section 3 “Introducing stakeholders, related programmes and activities with a special focus on their

relevance to R&I activities within Danube Region”. The present section, therefore, aims to provide a

holistic view on the stakeholders under investigation. Therefore it focuses on those questions and

replies which are found significant from the point of view of research and innovation policy dialogue,

which provide new insights and eventually can help us formulate recommendations.

4.1.1 Targeted Field

We have identified three main fields to be targeted being research, innovation and education with the

possibility to choose more if relevant. As the figure shows below (Figure 10), one third of the initiatives

focus on all the three fields (16 – 33 %), and innovation is by far the most popular: 35 stakeholders –

71 % of the initiatives have innovation as one of the targeted fields. Many stakeholders have indicated

other targeted fields as well such as finance, economy, cooperation, lobbying, and enterprise

development.

Figure 10: Number of stakeholders targeting research, innovation and education

Question: What are the targeted fields of your initiative?

Choose more if relevant.

- Research - Innovation - Education - Other – please specify


58

4.1.2 Scientific areas targeted

The questionnaire listed a set of research areas – mostly based on the thematic priorities of FP7 – and

asked if the initiatives targeted these or any at all. We can see that among the 49 stakeholders, 57 %

have different thematic priorities in focus whereas 43 % of them do not focus on a scientific field of

any kind.

Among the scientific areas targeted, the most favoured ones are “Environment, climate change” (12%)

followed by “Social sciences and humanities” (10 %) as well as by “Energy” (10 %). The less preferred

fields are “Space” (0.65%) and “Health” (1.30%).

Figure 11: Scientific areas targeted by stakeholders

1% 3%

5%3%

10%

7%

12%

10%5%

1%

43%

Health

ICT

Biotechnology, food, agriculture

Nanotechnology, manufacturing

Energy

Transport

Environment, climate change

Social sciences and humanities

Security

Space

No specific targeted field

Question: Does you initiative target any scientific areas?

YES/NO

If yes, please specify, choose more if relevant

- Health - ICT - Biotechnology, food, agriculture - Nanotechnology, manufacturing - Energy - Transport - Environment, climate change - Social sciences and humanities - Security

- Space


59

4.2 Funding

4.2.1 Funding Source of the Initiative

As the diagram below shows, the funding source of the initiatives analysed are mainly (77%) public.

32% of the public funding comes from national and only 8% from regional resources.

Figure 12: Funding source of initiatives

4.2.2 Type of Activities funded

Out of the 49 initiatives, 26 provide funding for programmes covering different types of activities such

as research and development, innovation, mobility career development, networking and joint use of

R&D facilities/laboratories. Networking (participation in workshops, conferences) seem to be the most

8%

32%

31%

14%

15%

Source of Funding

Public (regional)

Public (national)

Public (EU)

Private

Other

Question: What is the funding source of your initiative?

- Public (regional) - Public (national) - Public (EU) - Private - Other, please specify

Question: What type of activities do you fund?

Choose more if relevant

R&D projects - Innovation projects - Mobility, career development - Networking (workshops, conferences) - Joint use of R&D facilities/joint laboratories - Others, please specify


60

popular activity to be funded: 39% of the initiatives support this type of activity. Apart from the

activities listed in the question, stakeholders mentioned the following activities they provide financing

for: organisation of/participation in summer schools, knowledge exchange programmes, participation

in trainings, etc.

Figure 13: Type of activities funded by selected stakeholders (if any)

4.3 Cooperation along the Triple Helix

Interestingly, our findings shows that in case of organisations under investigation there is an existing

cooperation along the triple helix: almost one third of the initiatives (14) targets all the three sectors,

including SMEs, the government and other public authorities as well as public research institutions and

universities.

1011 11

19

6

14

0

5

10

15

20

R&D projects Innovationprojects

Mobility, careerdevelopment

Networking(workshops,conferences)

Joint use of R&Dfacilities/jointlaboratories

Other

Type of Activities Funded

Question: Do you have or do you envisage to have any

actions to foster the creation of triple helix?

a. Do you target SMEs/start-ups with your actions? b. What is your relation to government/public

authorities? c. Do you have any connections with public research

institutions/universities? Do you consider them as the target group of your actions?


61

Figure 14: Cooperation along the Triple Helix

Huge differences cannot be observed among the different sectors; 33 organisations consider the public

sphere as the most relevant target group, whereas SMEs are considered by 26.

Figure 15: Main Targeted Sectors of the Initiatives

4.4 Cooperation among stakeholders

26

3133

SMEs Government/public authorities Public researchinstitutions/universities

Question: Do you have any cooperation with other stakeholders which play a relevant role in the Danube region?

- Yes o If yes, please give the names of the

stakeholders - No


62

The question was targeted at mapping the existing relations/network of the 49 stakeholders including

their connections to relevant national/international/EU bodies which are considered to play a

significant role in the Danube Region as well as their awareness about similar projects/programmes.

The figure below (Figure 16) shows that every stakeholder has its own established network of national

and regional stakeholders and there are strong connections between stakeholders and the European

Commission, the EUSDR (and its related Priority Areas). Ostensibly, networks or other stakeholders

targeting higher education institutions (CEEPUS, DRC, CASEE) are interconnected and are related to

PA7. Similarly, innovation focused entities (such as Steinbeis Centres, DanuClus, DCCA) are also

interlinked and linked to the respective PA, namely to PA8. Regional or transnational organizations

covering different regions from the Danube region (e.g. BSEC, SECI, SEEIC) are evidently separated. In

case of international associations under investigation (ECA, EURADA), they do not have any direct

relation to other regional stakeholders.

However, as regards the rest of stakeholders, interconnections could be reinforced and multiplied

among them (although the web is not exhaustive due to the fact that it only reveals the relation web

of the stakeholders under investigation without taking into consideration stakeholders out of the

scope of the analysis).

Figure 16: Cooperation web of selected stakeholders

4.5 Self-Evaluation of the Initiatives

In the first round of interviews, stakeholders have been asked in the questionnaire and also during the

interviews to evaluate the impact of their initiatives. They had to rate the above statements on a scale

of 1-5 (1=disagree, 5=agree). 18 stakeholders provided their opinion. The results can be seen in the

following table.

1 2 3 4 5

Positive results of the initiative are visible and measurable 0 0 4 3 11

The programme has led to huge interest among target groups 1 0 2 6 9

The initiative contributes to deepening regional cooperation 0 1 1 4 12

The projects are by far too small to have a visible impact 7 4 2 2 2

Lack of political will and/or funding limits the outcomes of the initiative

4 2 3 4 5

Low efficiency: high administrative burdens and costs for minimal output and impact

6 1 2 4 2

We are aware of synergies with other programmes which we intend to exploit as much as possible.

0 0 0 1 11

Table 4: Self-evaluation of interviewed stakeholders

The table shows that most representatives of the initiatives seem to be satisfied with the impact of

their initiatives: the majority of them believe that their positive results are visible, target groups are

interested and their activities contribute to deepening regional cooperation. The role of political will

and/or funding limits divided the opinions: only half of the respondents agreed (entirely or rather) with

the fact that political will can significantly influence the outcome of the initiatives, and almost the same

amount of respondents disagreed with this statement completely. Similarly, regarding the efficiency

of stakeholders, a third of the respondent agreed that administrative burdens and costs can minimize

the output, whereas the other third strongly opposed this statement. More importantly, all

stakeholders under investigation are aware of synergies with other programmes and initiatives.

Question: Please give your opinion regarding the following statements:

- Positive results of the initiative are visible and measurable

- The programme has led to huge interest among target groups

- The initiative contributes to deepening regional cooperation

- The projects are by far too small to have a visible impact

- Lack of political will and/or funding limits the outcomes of the

initiative

- Low efficiency: high administrative burdens and costs for minimal

output and impact

- We are aware of synergies with other programmes which we intend

to exploit as much as possible.


65

4.6 Impact Assessment of Targeted Initiatives

During the update of the report, stakeholders were asked to provide evidence regarding the impact of

the activities of their initiatives with a special view on their visibility and results achieved. They had to

answer the following questions and provide concrete numbers or evaluations as far as possible to

prove them. Information with this regard was received from 17 stakeholders based on which the

following statements can be formulated.

4.6.1 Visibility

Different levels of visibility can be distinguished in case of stakeholders under investigation: through

their communication and dissemination activities (1) they focus on reaching out their well-defined

target groups (DU, CEEPUS) or (2) beside their target groups they aim to contact as broad audience as

possible (ICPDR, DTP, EUA, JRC). To do so, they use multiple means, such as:

- presentations at different events (CASEE, DRC, CoDCR, Steinbeis, Ulm Follow-Up Group, ICPDR,

JRC),

- organisation of various events, conferences (Steinbeis, DU, ICPDR, JRC, CESCI, DRC, EEN, DTP),

- issuing scientific publications (DRC, DU, JRC, CESCI, IDM, OECD),

- maintaining regular contact with other stakeholders (BSEC, DRC, DU, Ulm Follow-up Group,

ICPDR, IDM, JRC),

- direct outreach of target group (EEN, CEEPUS, DU, DRC, CASEE, JRC, UPDR, OECD),

- wide dissemination of information through website, social media, regular publications,

newsletters, press releases (ICPDR, DTP, EUA, JRC, WBEDIF, BSEC, UPDR, CESCI, OECD).

The number of entities and the size of target groups reached differ significantly: in case of targeted

dissemination activities, they can be rather limited by getting in touch with 50-100

persons/organizations yearly through the meetings organized (CESCI, Steinbeis, CoDCR, CASEE, DRC);

whereas in case of broader dissemination activities, 1,000-10,000 stakeholders are reached out yearly

(JRC, EEN, EUA, DTP). Some of them underlined that even though they can rely on limited budget

through their network they can report significant visibility (CEEPUS).

The impact of communication and dissemination activities is nevertheless not monitored in every case;

during the second round of interviews only half of stakeholders mentioned that they use any kind of

monitoring tools. Most of them collect survey and feedback evaluations following their events (EEN,

Steinbeis, DTP, ICPDR, EUA, JRC). In these cases the satisfaction rate of participants or clients are above

85% (JRC, EEN). In addition to this, funding programmes use other tools to monitor the impact, such

as network and mobility reports (CEEPUS) or focus group interviews (DTP).

Visibility

a. How would you describe the visibility of your initiative? How many people/organizations have you reached in 2015?

b. How do you reach the public with your results? Which dissemination activities do you use? c. Have you used satisfaction questionnaires? If yes, what have been the results?


66

4.6.2 Impact/results

Since the scope and character of stakeholders under investigation is diverse, it is hard to set up defined

criteria to measure their impact and results achieved. Therefore they were asked to list the most

relevant issues which can be considered as the results of their activities. The list overlaps with the

indicators of visibility listed above:

- events organized (EEN, JRC, Steinbeis, DTP, UPDR, EUA, OECD),

- projects funded (BSEC, DRC, Ulm Follow-up, DTP, CEEPUS),

- projects submitted to other funds (DRC, CASEE, DU, Steinbeis, UPDR, EUA),

- own activities, such as summer schools (DRC, DU), setting up technology transfer centres

(Steinbeis), road show in the target region (OECD, CoDCR), launching EGTCs (CESCI), trainings,

courses (CESCI, EEN), matchmaking events (EEN), joint degree programme (CASEE),

- size of target group reached out (DU, CEEPUS, EEN, Steinbeis, DTP).

However, in some cases, stakeholders outlined that the impact of their activities cannot be simply

measured by these indicators since they are only the starting point of further activities which are

supposed to be generated by their activities and took on as well as multiplied by their target groups.

In addition, it was worth to examine the impact of these stakeholders with regard to their contribution

to the intensification of regional cooperation. Basically all organizations under investigation aims to

contribute to deepening regional cooperation; even in case of certain organizations working at EU or

international level (EEN, OECD, UNESCO) through specific programmes they are active in the Region

and facilitating interaction in-between regional actors.

Stakeholders pointed out that internal or external evaluation procedures (if there is any) underline

that they achieved this aim through their activities. Again, most of them consider the number of yearly

organized events (deepening on the scope and budget of stakeholders can vary from 5 to 25) and the

size of the target group they managed to reach out (countries, policy-makers, researchers, innovators,

etc.). For instance, a recent study show that CEEPUS is an important career factor for teachers from

the region; and even this was not an explicit objective of the study, findings indicate that CEEPUS tends

to keep them in the region.

With regard to the intensification of regional cooperation, stakeholders under investigation face

various obstacles, such as:

- limited and insufficient quality of national, EU and international funding opportunities (BSEC,

CASEE, CEEPUS, DU, EEN, Steinbeis, Ulm Follow-up, UPDR, IDM, JRC),

Results/impacts:

a. What have been the measurable results of your initiative? Number of projects generated, number of programmes launched, number of conferences organized, etc.

b. Does your initiative contribute to deepen regional cooperation? If yes, how do you measure it? Number of regional conferences organized, etc.

c. What are the main obstacles you have identified which limit the outcomes of your initiative? – Lack of political will, lack/insufficiency of funding, high administrative burden, lack of international partners, etc.


67

- time consuming mechanisms of decision-making in case of political decisions, policies,

programmes, etc. (BSEC, OECD),

- cumbersome national or EU regulations (CEEPUS, DRC, OECD),

- slight chances to get funding from EU funds which demotivate stakeholders or target groups

e.g. in case of H2020, lack of smaller programmes (DU, DRC, CASEE),

- lack of human resources, language skills (EEN, JRC),

- lack of clear frameworks, lack of strategies (UPDR, WBEDIF),

- lack of trust among stakeholders (CESCI),

- lack of political will, changes of governments resulting in new political priorities and directions

(Steinbeis, Ulm Follow-up, IDM, OECD, WBEDIF, CESCI),

- problem of ownership (JRC, UPDR).

Most stakeholders pinpointed the limited availability of national and/or EU funds, especially in

countries lying at the lower stream of the Danube. In addition, the heterogeneity of the Region is also

considered as the main obstacle either in terms of economic, political or social factors.

Lack of ownership was also mentioned by various interviewees referring to the fact that stakeholders

(including the EC, national governments or other actors) in the Region frequently do not take the

responsibility of providing the necessary means for deepening regional cooperation, including financial

and human resources or the legal/political frame. In addition, subsequent governments often drop

initiatives launched by their predecessor which makes the implementation of long-term programmes

and cooperation difficult.


68

5 Outcomes of Stakeholders’ Workshops Relating to this report, the organization of three events was envisagedwith the following three main

objectives:

(1) disseminating the results of this report,

(2) promoting the extension of existing frameworks, enabling the harmonization of synergies and

supporting strategic decisions, and

(3) collecting further information for the update of the report due in the last year of the project.

The first Danube-INCO.NET Stakeholders’ Workshop under the title Enhancing synergies in research

and innovation programmes in the region was organized back-to-back with the meeting of the Steering

Platform on Research for the Western Balkan Countries on 8 June 2015 in Budapest focusing on specific

synergies between research, innovation (RI) and higher education (HE) programmes and other

activities supporting researchers & innovators in the Danube Region with those specifically active in

and for the Western Balkans. The event was attended by 37 stakeholders from almost all countries of

the Danube Region and some beyond (Turkey, Italy).

Picture 1: Participants of the 1st Stakeholders’ Workshop held in Budapest on 8 June 2015



at the 4th Annual Forum of the EU Strategy for the Danube Region on 30 October 2015 in Ulm. The

workshop had a special focus on research and innovation support, therefore addressed two of the

EUSDR priority areas: PA 7 „Knowledge Society” and PA 8 „Competitiveness”. In addition to the listed

goals, the workshop aimed to

- to facilitate their further involvement of the relevant stakeholders in the implementation of

the EUSDR,

- to promote dialogue within the triple helix (academia-industry-policy).16

16 See the list of panellists in Annex IV.


69

The event consisted of short elevator speeches delivered by 14 stakeholders with a focus on good

practices and means to promote dialogue within the triple helix on the one hand; on the other hand

to find the ways of reinforcing this kind of cooperation along the Danube River in the frame of EUSDR.

Picture 2: Panellists of the 2nd Stakeholders’ Workshop held in Ulm, on 30 October 2015

Main topics discussed and outcomes of these workshops are summarized in the following sections.

5.1 Good practices & Identified Necessities

Invited stakeholders pinpointed several good practices which could be transferred to other initiatives

existing in the Danube Region. The most important ones could be summarized as follows:

Continuous dialogue with national and EU stakeholders

Continuous dialogue with relevant national and EU stakeholders enables the harmonization of

research and innovation programmes and fosters the identification of existing or future synergies in

funding or other mechanisms applied. In practice, most stakeholders are in touch with national or EU

stakeholders, i.e. the Regional Cooperation Council underlined that during the programming period

they are in close coordination with IPA II coordinators and national ministries. This can be observed in

case of the Central European Initiative too. The representative of the Danube Rectors’ Conference

pinpointed that their meetings are attended by representatives of the European Commission. DRC and

Danube Universities are in close cooperation with the Joint Research Centre of the European

Commission. The representative of the Black Sea Economic Cooperation confirmed that due to the

geographical overlaps with various EU policies (ENPI, EUSDR, etc.) they are in cooperation with

relevant EU bodies.

Technology and knowledge transfer: involvement of SMEs

Beside research excellence, important emphasis is put on technology and knowledge transfer by many

stakeholders (e.g. SEE, WISE, CEI-PRAISE, OECD, Steinbeis) in the form of specific support actions. Even

networks of universities such as DRC and DU are placing more efforts on involving SMEs in their

actions which paves the way for a stronger collaboration among universities and businesses.


70

Nevertheless, to strengthen the involvement of the industry, long-term programmes are needed

which allow private companies to plan their engagement and allocate the related financial resources

in advance.

Dialogue within the Triple Helix

Apart from existing dialogue between government – academia and academia – industry it can be

observed that dialogue also exists to a certain extent along the government – academia – industry axis:

the Danube Technology Transfer Centres of Steinbeis as well as the triple helix partnerships launched

by the OECD in Western Balkan countries represent significant examples of this dialogue. Nevertheless,

important efforts are needed to move forward with this dialogue along the Danube, possibly by

using national or EU funds. Since the triple helix model supposes dynamic partnerships among the

sectors involved, it could be an option to support the achievement of priorities defined by the EUSDR,

with a special regard to PA7 & PA8. Even so, Triple Helix initiatives can be implemented with limited

financial resources and even in countries with less developed levels of RI. Regarding the sustainability

of such initiatives, participants agreed that while national or EU funds can support the setup of

collaborative mechanisms, in the long run stakeholders of industry shall secure their financial

sustainability themselves.

Implementation and impact oriented programming

Both the representative of Western Balkans Innovation Strategy Exercise Centre (WISE) and RCC

reported that they aim to formulate Action Plans with specific, targeted outputs. EU programmes in

the funding period of 2014-2020 also propose to put a special focus on projects outcomes and impact

when it comes to funding research and innovation activities to reinforce their socio-economic effects.

These aspects should be taken up by other regional initiatives. Also, to be able to measure the long-

term impact of a programme, more focus on monitoring is needed. Statistical and socio-economic

analyses are important methods for monitoring action plans. A good example for this is the Balkans

Public Sentiment Index which aims at supporting informed stakeholders’ decisions through statistical

analyses and monitoring of citizens’ opinion on public interventions.

Importance of co-funding and facilitating the access to EU funds

Half of the initiatives under investigation provide funding for various research and innovation related

activities. However, financial difficulties may occur in case of these initiatives as well – as it was

reported by BSEC. Almost each stakeholder underlined that for the implementation of their activities,

fundraising through various channels (including national, regional and EU sources) is inevitable. Thus

some of them (e.g. CEI, DRC, DU) have specific activities to support their members in applying for EU

funds. In addition, a few of them (e.g. DRC) are launching new funds to support activities in the frame

of EUSDR. Consequently the use of existing funds to support common priorities (e.g. EUSDR) is highly

needed. There is also a need to identify and exploit all available opportunities. Moreover, the use of

various EU funds for certain activities to amplify their outreach and impact is also recommended at

EU level.17 This means that projects can receive funding from various sources including ERDF, EACEA,

Horizon 2020, etc., if each fund covers different activities within the project.

17 European Commission (2014)


71

Dialogue among regional stakeholders

Both the report at hand and presentations, discussions at the workshops gave evidence on several

existing synergies among stakeholders under investigation. If it comes either to broadening the scope

of their activities or harmonizing their programmes, on-going communication and exchange of

information among these stakeholders would be beneficial. Therefore all stakeholders are

encouraged to improve the visibility of their activities on their websites, via newsletters, etc. on the

one hand; on the other hand, dedicated events shall be organized or the participation of different

stakeholders should be supported at various events to provide opportunity for a continuous

dialogue among stakeholders of the Danube Region. The project Danube-INCO.NET is ready to

facilitate these activities. Improved awareness on existing programmes, joint programmes or the

combined use of stakeholders’ funds shall also be a significant outcome of this dialogue.

5.2 Key messages & lessons learnt from the view of the EUSDR

As already introduced, the EU Strategy for the Danube Region covers several aspects in the field of RI

in the region. Since the launch of the Strategy some lessons have been already learnt with regard to

the feasibility of the implementation of these aspects. In line with these a few messages were also

concluded during the workshops.

Need for improved cooperation among PAs

To contribute to a more efficient implementation of the EUSDR, there is a need for improved

cooperation among different Priority Area Steering Groups. There is only rare evidence that different

PA SGs are aware of the operation and activities of other PAs, their priorities and related activities,

even though they have overlapping focuses. During the 2nd Stakeholders Workshop both PA7 and PA8

coordinators welcomed the idea of holding joint sessions to harmonize future steps, start a mutual

dialogue on them and define concrete plans with a special regard to the necessity of updating these

priorities.18

More information and visibility

As panellists reported, research and innovator actors from the Danube Region are generally not aware

either of available opportunities or activities organized in the frame of the EUSDR thus they do not

have chance for networking and fundraising if they wish to implement projects within the Region. Thus

participants agreed that both the business sphere and the academia shall get more information and

better explanation on the activities and available opportunities implemented in the frame of the

EUSDR as well as their participation in related meetings, such as the Annual Fora. If they show up at

such events, more can be done in the future with their involvement.

From Triple Helix to Quadruple Helix

The reinforcement of the triple helix approach, with a special regard to the effective and durable

cooperation between the business spheres is still a must but further steps are needed. Since the EUSDR

does not solely target the research and innovation spheres and there are important stakeholders

addressing other fields and spheres too, the involvement of cities, regions as well as the civil society

in related actions shall be also reinforced since they are the end-users of research and innovation

18 As a result, PA7 and PA8 held a joint SG meeting in December 2015 in Budapest organized back-to-back to the project General Assembly of Danube-INCO.NET.


72

projects. Such extension of the triple helix model towards the quadruple helix model has already been

launched in Croatia on social innovation by OECD and it is envisaged for instance by the Central Europe

and the Danube Transnational Programme or H2020 where multidisciplinary research and the

involvement of the end-users are encouraged if it is not a prerequisite of a successful proposal. Also,

in the frame of the EUSDR opening towards the civil sphere creates the necessity of the dialogue with

other PAs, i.e. PA9 People and skills.


73

6 Conclusions Based on the previous sections including the outcomes of the two workshops (detailed in section 5), it

can be said that an important number of good practices and synergetic activities can be identified

regarding the operation of stakeholders under investigation. Most of these practices have the potential

to be made visible for others and promoted, as well as discussed and conclude lessons learnt, in order

to contribute to an enhance regional cooperation in RI.

6.1 Policy dialogue and priority setting

1) A few initiatives have already proved to be successful in influencing decision-making at

national or EU-level (EURADA, VEF).

2) Several initiatives have already made important efforts to be more involved in the

implementation of the Strategy (CoDCR, DanuClus, Ulm Follow-up Group, DRC).

3) In the upcoming period, many of the initiatives aim at reinforcing their lobbying activities at

EU level in order to (1) achieve their goals and to (2) strengthen their role in the

implementation of EUSDR.

4) Many, e.g. CEI, SEEIC, Eurochambers, have already harmonized their action plans or strategies

with the Europe 2020 Strategy. In several cases, this stands for the Danube Strategy as well. It

can be also noted that there is a number of initiatives whose establishment was boosted by

the Strategy; however, many of them did not result in significant achievements so far (e.g.

DanuClus).

5) Based on the self-assessment stakeholders under investigation are aware of potential

synergies but there is no proof for joint actions neither in priority setting nor in defining the

scope and target of programmes.

6) The main obstacle to cooperation, beside the lack of funds, is the heterogeneity of the Region

in terms of social, political and economic factors. The lack of funds was also deemed crucial,

however, there are a number of funds available, even though potential beneficiaries cannot

apply for them due to various (legal, institutional or financial) factors.

7) Only half of stakeholders at EU or international levels (EUA, OECD, UNESCO, JRC, EEN) covering

through their members the whole Danube Region reflect the priorities of the EUSDR in their

strategies or action plans and support their members/target groups to take part in the


6.2 Main features of activities or programmes carried out by stakeholders

1) Half of stakeholders provide funding for programmes covering different types of activities such

as research and development, innovation, mobility career development, networking and joint

use of R&D facilities/laboratories. It cannot be stated that there are unnecessary overlaps

among these programmes, however, regarding their scope, target audience and publication of

calls, coordination is ostensibly missing.

2) Few stakeholders (DRC, EUREKA, Ulm Follow-up Group) launched new funds available for

researchers and innovators in the region to support the implementation of the EUSDR.

However, the scale of grants and funding are strongly dependent of the participants in most

cases (i.e. national governments).

3) There is a strong will to support & promote businesses (DCCA, Danubiz, Ulm Follow-up Group,

etc.), especially SMEs (through providing training, advice or creating an adequate environment


74

for them). But grants targeting the industry, with a special regard to SMEs are not yet entirely

tailor-made for their needs.

4) Networking is of utmost importance from the policy level through the research community to

the civil sphere. There is an important number of initiatives providing platform and/or funding

for networking events, however, there is need for multiplying them.

5) All stakeholders in the Region aims at deepening regional cooperation: the impact of a few of

them is proven by external evaluation, e.g. CEEPUS facilitated that teachers did not leave the

Danube Region.

6) Some stakeholders (CoDCR, Visegrad Fund, UPDR, DCSF) put special focus also on the

involvement of citizens through awareness raising campaigns, programmes dedicating

dissemination, etc. Networks targeting additional fields (civil sphere, chambers of commerce,

SMEs or companies) also achieved success in addressing their audience.

7) Potential beneficiaries of their programmes are usually not aware of all available

opportunities.

8) Future priorities seem to converge to: (a) generating joint projects in the region – including in

the frame of H2020, transnational programmes and smaller scale cooperation programmes,

educational cooperation, etc. -; (b) capacity building; (c) promoting SMEs, business

development and entrepreneurship; (d) focus on intercultural society, cultural heritage,

culture; (e) facilitating tourism, trade and investment.

6.3 Initiatives targeting Cross-sectoral Dialogue

1) An important majority (71%) of stakeholders under investigation targets innovation as one of

their main activities, whereas research and education are almost of equal importance. One

third of the initiatives focus on all the three fields, meaning that triple helix cooperation does

exist in the Region even though there is room for improvement.

2) Knowledge and technology transfer is supported by several stakeholders (e.g. Steinbeis, OECD,

CEI, KICs, JRC), however, huge gaps have to be overcome within the Region in this field: only a

third of stakeholders under investigation (e.g. Steinbeis, JRC, DCCA, CEI, KICs) is devoted to the

enhancement of cooperation in the triple helix.

3) Cooperation along the quadruple helix axes can be hardly tracked down in the Region, even

though the civil sphere represents the end-user side of research, innovation and education

actions. The recently launched European Transnational Cooperation Programmes (including

the CE and Danube TP) pointed out the importance and supports the involvement of the civil

society in research and innovation projects.


75

7 Policy Recommendations on exploiting synergies and transferring good

practices Based on the previous sections of the paper, a set of policy recommendations are formulated to

facilitate the exploitation of synergies and to support the possible transfer of good practices in the

field of research, innovation, as well as the related fields of education. These recommendations are

mainly grouped around the different type of activities proposed to be carried out by stakeholders.

Most of them can stand alone addressing a certain group of stakeholders but they are important

elements of the enhanced implementation of the related actions of EUSDR too.

7.1 Reinforced Policy Dialogue among Stakeholders to Exploit Synergies and

Achieve Mutual Goals

Most stakeholders share common targets and many of these organizations have already harmonized

their action plans or strategies with the Europe 2020 Strategy. In many cases, this stands for the

Danube Strategy as well, which is in fact the tailor-made version of Europe 2020 to the Danube Region.

With this regard, in order to reach the above mentioned targets the following proposals are made:

a) All stakeholders including political initiatives, networks, associations, etc. are invited to get

engaged in and maintain a continuous dialogue with each other to ensure the achievement of

their objectives in the most appropriate ways through the most appropriate means. More

specifically, it is proposed to

i. enhance the visibility of the initiatives and opportunities available for the RI community (e.g.

via the new EURO ACCESS website https://danube-euroaccess.eu/), find complementarities

among their programmes/initiatives (e.g. SEE 2020, BSEC Action Plan, CEI Plan of Actions,

etc.) and through harmonized actions seek to achieve more than through individual efforts.

This can be done either by joint actions of the various stakeholders or by defining the

actions of each stakeholder to eliminate unnecessary overlaps;

ii. harmonize and synchronize funding mechanisms (e.g. PDF, HDF, CEEPUS, CEI Cooperation

Fund, WISE, Visegrad Fund, etc.) for research and innovation in terms of priorities, scientific

fields targeted, timing of calls, characteristics of funded projects, funding rules etc.;

iii. engage in cooperation and take the responsibility of moving forward regional cooperation

in RI and educational programmes. Responsible actors are needed who are engaged in

launching joint programmes and ensuring the financial support for such initiatives to secure

their long-term impact – the role and commitment of national governments and the EU

shall be clearly defined with this regard;

iv. in addition, explore and support the exploitation of funding opportunities provided by the

different funding instruments, such as Horizon 2020, ENPI, IPA, Cohesion Policy, Erasmus +,

national funds, etc.;

v. priorities of stakeholders shall also take into consideration the regional innovation

strategies (smart specialization strategies, S3) both to benefit from the added value of

unique capacities, facilities and developments of regions covered by these stakeholders and

to contribute to the growth of these regions.

Regional stakeholders are envisaged to get engaged in a multilateral dialogue with each other to achieve the above-listed goals. The project Danube-INCO.NET aims at facilitating the set-up and framing of this dialogue by organizing dedicated events, which will focus on presenting the report at hand and its results, providing a platform for stakeholders to share their reflections and their


76

own experiences, and launching a multilateral dialogue, which shall not end with the project. Rather, it is suggested that within EUSDR, respective PAs (PA7 and PA8) shall sustain it.

b) All initiatives working in the Region shall reinforce the synergies with EUSDR. By doing so, it is

important to engage in dialogue with the relevant Priority Areas (depending on the topic but

mainly with PA7 Knowledge Society, PA8 Competitiveness and PA9 People and Skills) and find

opportunities of synergetic actions.

c) Continuous dialogue is needed at the level of various Priority Areas which cover overlapping

topics of the Strategy to harmonize their agendas, share the results and facilitate the overcoming

of potential obstacles.

The project Danube INCO-NET aims to take a pivotal role in this process through its activities in facilitating policy dialogue, priority setting, identifying synergies, information dissemination, pilot activities, as well as the launching of the regional funding mechanism, etc. The project has already supported the organization of joint PA meetings which shall regularly take place in the upcoming future.

d) By responding to the heterogeneity of the Danube Region, the aspects of culture, tourism, trade

shall be emphasized in the research and innovation agenda as well beside current, also

significant research topics, such as energy, climate, biodiversity, etc.

e) Harmonization of priorities to exploit synergies might be pursued by stakeholders acting in

different regions. Therefore dialogue (through joint events, exchange of experiences, etc.) with

other regions and/or macro regions (Baltic Sea-, Adriatic-Ionian- or Alpine Region Strategies) is

also recommended.

7.2 Enhanced Involvement in the Implementation of EUSDR

Stakeholders acting in the Region shall broaden their involvement in the Danube Strategy: partly as

they are geographically affected, partly due to their mutual interests, objectives and priorities in the

field of research and innovation. This fact also points out the need, in line with the above detailed

dialogue among regional stakeholders, that European or international stakeholders present in the

Danube Region shall be approached in a more comprehensive way. This can be done by various

means as follows:

a) Following the example of several regional actors (e.g. CoDCR, Ulm Follow-up Group, etc.) it is

recommended to tighten further linkages with the EU organizations, with a special view on the

European Commission but also with the Council of Regions, Eurochambers, Enterprise Europe

Network, etc. It is important to represent and lobby for regional interests, channel in know-how

and good practices. Continuous cooperation and exchange of information with respective priority

area (especially with PA7 and 8) Steering Groups are also recommended.

b) Vice versa, associations, networks and other fora at EU level (Eurochambers, EURADA) shall also

reflect to the regional strategies such as EUSDR in their programmes following the example of EEN,

JRC, CEI, EUREKA, etc.

a) At the level of concrete actions, it is also important to strengthen the implementation of EUSDR

activities, if needed, by securing the necessary financial resources, especially in the fields covered

by PA7 Knowledge Society, PA8 Competitiveness and PA9 People and Skills. The support of small

and medium scale projects are welcome which could prepare the RI community for EU level


77

programmes (i.e. H2020). Thus, stakeholders are encouraged to secure resources or dedicated

funds for projects initiated by beneficiaries from the Region either through

a. dedicated call, as it was launched by EUREKA,

b. separate fund, as it was initiated by DRC.

Since most countries of the Danube Region shows lower rates regarding their participation in

H2020, dedicated calls in upcoming Working Programmes would be also welcome.

7.3 Expanding Joint Programmes to Connect and Exploit the Potentials of the

Region

As it was previously mentioned, the exploitation of synergies among the various programmes

suggests expanding them or making them complement each other. Since there are a number of

initiatives which fund similar programmes mainly in the field of education, research as well as

innovation such as joint academic, mobility or other kind of support programmes, the scope in terms

of number of participants, geographical and thematic coverage of these programmes should be

expanded by their joint planning and funding. Consequently the following issues shall be taken into

consideration by the relevant stakeholders:

b) Initiatives funding similar programmes are invited to foster the possibility of running joint

programmes through enlarging the scope of the original ones, for instance:

a. knowledge exchange programmes of CEI, CoDCR

b. mobility programmes of BSEC, CEEPUS, CEI, DRC, WISE, Visegrad Fund

c. R&D&I projects of BSEC, CASEE, CEI, DU, Visegrad Fund, etc.,

d. joint degree programmes of CEEPUS, DU, Visegrad Fund, etc.,

e. summer schools of CEI, DRC, DU, etc.,

f. staff exchange programmes of CEEPUS, CEI, EEN, DCCA, etc..

c) These well-functioning programmes are recommended to be broadened to other forms of

cooperation such as joint use of research infrastructure, knowledge sharing, knowledge and know-

how transfer, joint proposals to Horizon 2020 or other funding programmes, etc. as the case of

Danube Universities or DRC suggests.

d) Following the example of CEEPUS and CEI, it is suggested to initiate programmes resulting in

tangible outcomes, such as development of research infrastructure, specific research centres in

line with S3, etc.

7.4 Support the RI community

Apart from the above detailed measures, stakeholders aiming to improve the competitiveness and

raise excellence in the Danube Region shall target the RI community by complementary means as

well. The following actions could be considered:

a) Opportunities for networking, i.e. scientific conferences, brokerage events, workshops, etc.

shall be further promoted and, if possible, synchronized. Organization of joint or back-to-back

events (e.g. as side events of the Danube Annual Forum, EUREKA & PA7 SG meeting, etc.) by

various stakeholders on equally important topics is proposed to support the RI community of

the Danube Region in establishing mutually beneficial cooperation among them.


78

b) In many cases, the RI community needs financial support to attend such events thus

programmes supporting their networking shall be further expanded.

c) Stakeholders shall spread information on calls, programmes, events, etc. in a targeted and

well-structured way..

The newsletter of the project Danube-INCO.NET having over 11,000 subscriptions started this well-structure way of disseminating information on funding opportunities, programmes, events and any relevant issues on a bi-weekly basis. Following the project this means shall be sustained, most probably by PA7, PA8, or PA10 and further extended to reach out as many potential beneficiaries as possible. Available information on funding opportunities is envisaged to be merged with the database of EURO ACCESS Danube Region website.

d) By doing so, different funds existing in the Danube Region are recommended to be exploited

more efficiently.

e) Stakeholders, especially programme owners are recommended to take over the good practices

of existing funding programmes (CEEPUS, Horizon 2020) in reducing administrative burdens of

researchers in proposal writing and project management. It is also recommended to eliminate

existing obstacles (legal, administrative and financial) of beneficiaries to enable them to apply

for the available funds.

f) SME support programmes should take into consideration the need of the industry through

long-term programmes allowing private companies to plan their engagement and allocate the

related financial resources in advance.

g) At national level, policy makers are invited to encourage the national RI community to be more

involved in the implementation of the Strategy through exploiting available opportunities.

h) Impact of stakeholders shall further contribute to deepening regional cooperation and

competitiveness: the impact of programmes shall reinforce that the RI community stays in the

Region, deepens its collaboration and give rise to regional growth.

7.5 Strengthened dialogue among the academia – industry – government and the

civil sphere Although an important number of programmes targeting either research or innovation or education

were identified in the Danube Region, cross-sectoral cooperation in line with the Triple Helix approach

shall be further promoted. Linking the academia – industry – government, and if possible, the civil

society is of utmost significance in the Region to achieve not only the RI related objectives, but those

of economy and competitiveness as well.

a) Consequently stakeholders are invited to develop joint research – innovation – education

programmes to ensure the dialogue and the exchange of know-how among the various sectors,

following the example of Steinbeis, the KICs, CEI, etc. by using national or EU funds. Regarding the

sustainability of such initiatives, in the long run stakeholders shall secure their financial

sustainability themselves.

b) Links among science, academia, and business shall be further promoted by other means, such as

targeted events (triple helix events), dialogue with European and National Technology Platforms,

clusters, JRC Danube Innovation Partnerships, as well as dissemination of Danube Transfer

Centres (DTCs), establishing double degree programmes, etc.

c) Both the business sphere and academia shall get more information on the activities and available

opportunities for cooperation in the frame of the EUSDR, their participation in related meetings,


79

such as the Annual Fora shall be more intensively promoted. It is important to explain to the

representatives of all three fields the mutual gains and benefits of the triple helix cooperation, as

well as their role in the implementation of the Danube Strategy to ensure their commitment.

Figure 17: Broadening the support of RI relevant actions of EUSDR might be backed by the approach of the quadruple helix

d) Since some stakeholders (CoDCR, Visegrad Fund, Danube TP) put special focus also on the

involvement of citizens who represent the end-users of RI actions, their involvement in certain

actions (regional priority setting, awareness raising campaigns) could be enhanced, to ensure the

broad support of EUSDR in line with the recent approach of quadruple helix (see Figure 17).

Government (EU, national & regional)

Academia (research institutes,

HEIs)

Industry (companies, SMEs)

Civil sphere (associations,

NGOs, networks)


80

8 Dissemination Roadmap This dissemination roadmap is elaborated to enable and support the dissemination activities carried

out through various channels. The dissemination of the report results will be a multiple-level activity.

8.1 Target group

The main target groups for the study at hand are policy-makers and programme owners, i.e. PA 7 & 8

Steering Groups, EU, national and regional decision-makers, scientific councils, as well as stakeholders

under investigation (EC DG Regio, DG Research and Innovation, regional initiatives such as the Central

European Initiative or the Visegrad Fund, etc.). Additionally, it can be relevant to any stakeholders in

the Region, as well as for the RI community who looks for cooperation opportunities. Accordingly our

dissemination activity targets the wider public applying the tools of external communication.

8.2 Dissemination methods, tools and channels

Since the target group of the report is broad and diverse, various methods for public dissemination

were arranged. The following methods have been identified as utmost important in this certain case

and will be discussed in details below:

- presentation at conferences, workshops, back-to-back events,

- cross project dissemination,

- direct mailing,

- newsletter,

- online activities on websites,

- social media appearance.

8.2.1 Presentation at conferences, workshops, back-to-back events

The results of the report shall be presented at first place at those events, where the main target group,

namely policy makers and programmes owners are present. It aims to boost the identification of

synergies and facilitate future dialogue among the stakeholders under investigation on the one hand,

and directly channel in any kind of additional recommendation with regard to the report on the other

hand. Project budget envisages three events organized back-to-back to other policy dialogue events,

such as Steering Group on Western Balkan Countries, PA7 and/or PA8 meetings, etc. during the project

lifetime. These events may be similar to the Stakeholders’ Forum where a two-way dialogue can be

established with the stakeholders under investigation.

Apart from these events, conferences, workshops and other types of back-to-back events will be

dedicated to the wider public in order to spread the report results. Project partners are invited to

disseminate the results of this report as broad as possible, e.g. through their existing networks and at

relevant national and regional events. To do so, a standard ppt (and prezi) is be prepared by RCISD19

which can be presented at any relevant event by project partners.

The following list of events provides a rough plan for dissemination which shall be updated and

concretized regularly:

19 They are available at http://rcisd.eu/stakeholders-mapping/


81

Two Stakeholders’ Workshops were organized by the project in its second year with the aim to

promote and disseminate the results of the current deliverable. The first Danube-INCO.NET

Stakeholders’ Workshop with the title Enhancing synergies in research and innovation programmes in

the region was organized back-to-back with the meeting of the Steering Platform on Research for the

Western Balkan Countries on 8 June 2015 in Budapest. The event focused on specific synergies

between research, innovation (R&I) and higher education (HE) programmes and other activities

supporting researchers & innovators in the Danube Region with those specifically active in and for the

Western Balkans. The event was attended by 37 stakeholders from almost all countries of the Danube

Region and some beyond (Turkey, Italy).



in the frame of the 4th Annual Forum of the EU Strategy for the Danube Region on 30 October 2015 in

Ulm. The workshop had a special focus on research and innovation support, therefore addressed two

of the EUSDR priority areas: PA 7 „Knowledge Society” and PA 8 „Competitiveness”, and provided an

excellent opportunity for promoting the results of the stakeholders mapping report.

Additional dissemination activities also occurred during the updating period of the deliverable. The

report and its outcomes have been disseminated and presented among others in the frames of the

following conferences, workshops, events:

•Policy Dialogue events under WP2

•General Assembly Meeting and side meetings

Danube-INCO.NET project events

•Ulm Follow-up Group meetings

•Steering Platform for the Western Balkan Countries meetings (half yearly)

•EUSDR Annual Fora (yearly)

•other PA Steering Group meetings (at least half yearly)

•meetings of DRC, RCC, Danube Business Forum, Vienna Economic Forum, Danube Transnational Programme Conferences, etc.

EUSDR related events

•events organized by projects relating to EUSDR (DREAM, DANCERS, etc.)

•other relevant macro-regional strategy events(Baltic Sea, Adriatic and Ionian, Alpine region strategy)

Other Appearance


82

Information Day "Horizon 2020 - steps for successful implementation" on 1 June, 2016 in

Ukraine, Odessa;

3rd Black Sea Stakeholder conference which took place on 14 June 2016 in Odessa, Ukraine in

the framework of the Conference on the blue economy of the Black Sea: towards better

integration on 13-14 June 2016 in Ukraine, Odessa;

Round table "European Strategy for the Danube Region: opportunities and challenges for the

Odessa region" on 5 July, 2016 in Ukraine, Odessa;

Dissemination Conference of Project Results “18 years of Cooperation in the Lower Danube

Euroregion” on 12 of August 2016 in Galati, Romania;

EcoSummit 2016 Ecological Sustainability: Engineering Change which took place on 29 August

- 1 September 2016 at Le Corum in Montpellier, France;

XX1 International scientific-practical conference Problems and Perspectives of Innovative

economic development on 12-15 September in Ukraine, Odessa.

8.2.2 Cross project dissemination

In order to ensure the accessibility of report results, it can be disseminated at the event of other

projects related to the EUSDR, for example the PA7’s flagship projects such as DRIFF, DREAM,

DANUBIUS or DANUBE:FUTURE. Accordingly, numerous cross project dissemination activities took

place after the publishing of the report. The outcomes of the deliverable and the report itself have

been disseminated via the following projects:

EU project “Tourism Paths of the Black Sea Region” BSB-TOUR 2627;

"Inventory, assessment and remediation of anthropogenic sources evaluation in the Lower

Danube region of Ukraine, Romania and Moldova "(ETC MIS 995);

Promotion of paludiculture in Black Sea region wetlands for carbon sequestration, sustainable

development and community-based renewable energy (SEC003/2016/WG3/02 -EaP CSF RE-

GRANTING 2016.

8.2.3 Direct mailing

As mentioned above, as a first stage of the preparation of the report, a preliminary database of

relevant stakeholders has been set up. This database includes the main information of stakeholders

including their contact details (contact person, address, e-mail, website), thus they can be informed

about the results of the mapping activity. The results can also be spread among respective stakeholders

to draw their attention to the synergies and their possible exploitation. Via direct mailing relevant

institutions of the EU can be also informed, i.e. respective branches of the EU Commission (including

Danube-INCO.NET’s Project Officer and the Head of Operational Sector - Macro-regional Strategy for

the Danube Region). After the finalization of the updated version of the report the interviewed

stakeholders will be informed about the updated deliverable and they will receive the document

through direct mailing.

8.2.4 Newsletter

Similarly to the direct mailing, stakeholders and other interested parties will be informed about the

results in the project newsletter which is published on a bi-monthly basis and circulated among 11,000

subscribers and the events where the result will be presented.


83

8.2.5 Online appearance on websites

Among online channels, the official project website (www.danube-inco.net) and partners’ websites are

recognized as main tools for public dissemination. The website of Danube-INCO.NET has a special role

in this kind of dissemination: first, the report and the regular dissemination activities will be made

public for the broad audience (average number of 2,400 visitors per month); second, it serves as an

online database by providing basic information on the stakeholders selected (ca. 100 programmes,

initiatives).

Apart from the project website, other partners involved in the project are invited to disseminate the

results of the stakeholders mapping activity and policy recommendations on their institutions’

websites.

8.2.6 Social media appearance

This tool can be/ will be used for raising awareness and to inform general public about the report

results. News about the report (and its availability) should appear through different channels, as via

the official Facebook and Twitter profile of Danube-INCO.NET. Subscribers will be informed on related

dissemination activities afterwards.

http://www.danube-inco.net/


84

9 Bibliography

European Commission (EC) (2014): Enabling synergies between European Structural and Investment

Funds, Horizon 2020 and other research, innovation and competitiveness-related Union programmes -

Guidance for policy-makers and implementing bodies. Luxemburg: European Commission

Müller, B., Klee, G., and Hunya, G. (2014): Socio-economic Assessment of the Danube Region: State of

the Region, Challenges and Strategy Development. Available at http://ftp.zew.de/pub/zew-

docs/gutachten/DanubeRegionFinalReportPartI2014.pdf (downloaded on 27.08.2014)

Saublens, C. (2013), Smart Makers of Entrepreneurial Regional Ecosystem. Available at

http://www.eurada.org/files/Innovation/Smart%20makers-EN.pdf (downloaded on 17.09.2014)

Presentations, documents relating to stakeholders

Danube 2014-2020: preparation of a transnational cooperation programme. Available at

http://kki.gov.hu/download/0/9d/b0000/Danube%20Programme%20-

%20Hegyesi%20B%C3%A9la%20-%20hiia.pptx (downloaded on 17.11.2014)

DanuClus: An Initiative of WG Cluster of Excellence PA8. Available at

http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/conferences/danube_forum2013/doc/ws3/04_danuclus_pa8_si

grid_winkler.pdf (downloaded on 10.08.2014)

Identifying the main Objectives and Activities of Cluster Programmes. Produced by the CEE –

Clusternetwork – European Clusters Alliance Consortium Partners. Available at http://www.eca-

tactics.eu/sites/default/files/page/10/07/CEE_ClusterNetwork.pdf (downloaded on 18.09.2014)

Overview of Western Balkans Research and Innovation Strategy Exercise (WISE). Available at

http://www.worldbank.org/content/dam/Worldbank/document/eca/wb13_WBI-Fiches_WISE.pdf

(downloaded on 28.10.2014)

Western Balkans Regional R&D Strategy for Innovation. October, 2013. Available at

http://www.rcc.int/download/docs/WBRIS%20Strategy10-21-

13%20web.pdf/a3c34a7d7bfa321e83e5b95824d792b4.pdf (downloaded on 28.10.2014)

DCCA Business Panorama of the Danube Region. Available at

http://www.dcca.eu/container/container_attachments/download/106 (downloaded on 10.11.2014)

Southeast Europe 2020 – Jobs and Prosperity in a European Perspective. RCC, Nov 2013. Available at

http://www.rcc.int/files/user/docs/reports/SEE2020-Strategy.pdf (downloaded on 28.10.2014)

Websites of stakeholders under investigation:

Association of Regional Development Agencies (EURADA) http://www.eurada.org/

Black Sea - Danube Regional Network for Social & Economic Innovation

http://www.houseofeurope.ro/BlackSea-Danube/

Black Sea Economic Cooperation (BSEC) http://www.bsec-organization.org/Pages/homepage.aspx

CASEE The Regional Network for Central and South Eastern Europe of ICA http://www.ica-casee.eu/

http://www.eurada.org/files/Innovation/Smart%20makers-EN.pdf

http://kki.gov.hu/download/0/9d/b0000/Danube%20Programme%20-%20Hegyesi%20B%C3%A9la%20-%20hiia.pptx

http://kki.gov.hu/download/0/9d/b0000/Danube%20Programme%20-%20Hegyesi%20B%C3%A9la%20-%20hiia.pptx

http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/conferences/danube_forum2013/doc/ws3/04_danuclus_pa8_sigrid_winkler.pdf

http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/conferences/danube_forum2013/doc/ws3/04_danuclus_pa8_sigrid_winkler.pdf

http://www.eca-tactics.eu/sites/default/files/page/10/07/CEE_ClusterNetwork.pdf

http://www.eca-tactics.eu/sites/default/files/page/10/07/CEE_ClusterNetwork.pdf

http://www.worldbank.org/content/dam/Worldbank/document/eca/wb13_WBI-Fiches_WISE.pdf

http://www.rcc.int/download/docs/WBRIS%20Strategy10-21-13%20web.pdf/a3c34a7d7bfa321e83e5b95824d792b4.pdf

http://www.rcc.int/download/docs/WBRIS%20Strategy10-21-13%20web.pdf/a3c34a7d7bfa321e83e5b95824d792b4.pdf

http://www.dcca.eu/container/container_attachments/download/106

http://www.rcc.int/files/user/docs/reports/SEE2020-Strategy.pdf

http://www.eurada.org/

http://www.houseofeurope.ro/BlackSea-Danube/

http://www.bsec-organization.org/Pages/homepage.aspx

http://www.ica-casee.eu/


85

CEEPUS - Central European Exchange Programme for University Studies https://www.ceepus.info/

CEI http://www.cei.int/

Central European Initiative University Network (CEI UniNet) http://www.cei.int/content/post-

graduate-studies-cei-university-network

Council of Danube Cities and Regions http://www.danubecities.eu/

Danube Alliance http://www.eudanube.com/

Danube Area Interregional Group at the Committee of the Regions http://enpi.interact-

eu.net/danube_strategy_links/cor_danube/296/4470

Danube Chambers of Commerce Association (DCCA) http://www.danubechambers.eu/

Danube Rectors Conference http://www.drc-danube.org/

Danube Universities http://danubeuniversities.eu/

Danubiz http://event.danubiz.eu/

Enterprise Europe Network http://www.enterpriseeurope.hu/

Eurochambers http://www.eurochambres.be/Content/Default.asp?

European Cluster Alliance http://www.eca-tactics.eu/eca

EUSDR http://www.danube-region.eu/

International Association for Danube Research http://www.iad.gs/

Regional Cooperation Council (RCC) http://www.rcc.int/

Salzburg Forum http://www.salzburgforum.org/

Southeast European Cooperative Initiative http://www.mfa.gov.rs/en/foreign-policy/eu/regional-

initiatives/seci

South-East European Cooperation Process http://www.mfa.gov.rs/en/foreign-policy/eu/regional-

initiatives/seecp

Southeast Europe Investment Committee (SEEIC) http://www.seeic.rcc.int/

Steering Platform on Research for the Western Balkan countries http://wbc-inco.net/usefultool/16

Steinbeis Danube Center (DE) http://www.stz-ost-west.de/en/steinbeis/steinbeis-donau-

zentrum.html

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) http://en.unesco.org/

Vienna Economic Forum http://www.vienna-economic-forum.com/

Visegrad 4 Cooperation http://www.visegradgroup.eu/about/cooperation

Visegrad Fund http://visegradfund.org/

Young Citizens Danube Network http://www.youngdanubians.eu/

Central Europe (CE) http://www.central2013.eu/

Southeast Europe (SEE)http://www.southeast-europe.net/

https://www.ceepus.info/

http://www.cei.int/

http://www.cei.int/content/post-graduate-studies-cei-university-network

http://www.cei.int/content/post-graduate-studies-cei-university-network

http://www.danubecities.eu/

http://www.eudanube.com/

http://enpi.interact-eu.net/danube_strategy_links/cor_danube/296/4470

http://enpi.interact-eu.net/danube_strategy_links/cor_danube/296/4470

http://www.danubechambers.eu/

http://www.drc-danube.org/

http://danubeuniversities.eu/

http://event.danubiz.eu/

http://www.enterpriseeurope.hu/

http://www.eurochambres.be/Content/Default.asp

http://www.eca-tactics.eu/eca

http://www.danube-region.eu/

http://www.iad.gs/

http://www.rcc.int/

http://www.salzburgforum.org/

http://www.mfa.gov.rs/en/foreign-policy/eu/regional-initiatives/seci

http://www.mfa.gov.rs/en/foreign-policy/eu/regional-initiatives/seci

http://www.mfa.gov.rs/en/foreign-policy/eu/regional-initiatives/seecp

http://www.mfa.gov.rs/en/foreign-policy/eu/regional-initiatives/seecp

http://www.seeic.rcc.int/

http://wbc-inco.net/usefultool/16

http://www.stz-ost-west.de/en/steinbeis/steinbeis-donau-zentrum.html

http://www.stz-ost-west.de/en/steinbeis/steinbeis-donau-zentrum.html

http://en.unesco.org/

http://www.vienna-economic-forum.com/

http://www.visegradgroup.eu/about/cooperation

http://visegradfund.org/

http://www.youngdanubians.eu/

http://www.central2013.eu/

http://www.southeast-europe.net/

10 Annex I – List of Stakeholders

Name of stakeholder Selected or

not – 1st

round

Selected or not – 2nd round

Background of selection or rejection

Academic Cooperation Association (ACA) Not Yes Focus related to RI

Alpe Adria Rectors Conference (Rectors' Conference of the Alps-Adriatic Universities (RCAAU))

Not Not Too general scope

ARGE Donauländer Not Not No focus on RI

Association of the European Chambers of Commerce and Industry (Eurochambers)

Yes Yes Focus related to RI

Association of Regional Development Agencies (EURADA) Yes Yes Focus related to RI

Association of the Danube Municipalities Not Not Too general scope

Austria - Italy Cross-border Co-operation Programme Not Not Covering only a marginal part of the region

Austria-Germany Cross-border Co-operation Programme Not Not Covering only a marginal part of the region

Austria-Slovenia Cross-border Co-operation Programme Not Not Covering only a marginal part of the region

Biobased for Growth - A PPP on Biobased Industries Not Not No specific focus on the region

Bioenergy 2020+ Not Not No specific focus on the region

Black Sea - Danube Regional Network for Social & Economic Innovation

Yes Not No significant activities identified


87

Black Sea Economic Cooperation (BSEC) Yes Yes Important good practices in regional cooperation; focus on RI

CASEE The Regional Network for Central and South Eastern Europe of ICA

Yes Yes Focus on HEI, RI

CEEPUS Yes Yes Important good practices in HEI programmes

Central European Initiative (CEI) Yes Yes Important good practices in regional cooperation; focus on RI

CEI Network of National Coordinators Not Not Marginal focus on RI

CEI University Network (CEI UniNet) Yes Grouped with CEI

Closely related to HEI and research in the region

Central European Service for Cross-Border Initiatives (CESCI) Not Yes Important good practices in regional cooperation; Closely related to HEI and research in the region

Council of Danube Cities and Regions (CoDCR) Yes Yes Important good practices in regional cooperation; focus on RI

Croatia-Slovenia Cross-border Co-operation Programme Not Not Covering only a marginal part of the region

Cross-border Cooperation Programme Austria – Hungary Not Not Covering only a marginal part of the region

Danube Academies Conference - European Academy of Sciences and Art

Not Not Too general scope

Danube Alliance Yes Yes Focus on regional cooperation in EUSDR

Danube Area Interregional Group at the Committee of the Regions

Yes Yes Focus on regional cooperation in EUSDR

Danube Business Advisory Council (DBAC) Not Not Marginal focus on RI

Danube Chambers of Commerce Association (DCCA) Yes Yes Important good practices in regional cooperation

Danube Civil Society Forum (DCSF) Not Yes Bringing in the civil society


88

Danube Media Network Not Not No focus on RI

Danube Rectors’ Conference Yes Yes Important good practices in HEI programmes, cooperation

Danube Region Programme / The South East Europe Transnational Cooperation Programme

Yes Yes Focus related to RI and the region

Danube Strategy Research Network Not Yes Focus related to RI and the region

Danube Universities Yes Yes Important good practices in HEI programmes, cooperation

Danubiz Yes Yes Focus on innovation and regional cooperation

DanuClus (Danube Cluster Networks) Yes Yes Focus related to RI and the region

EIT Climate KIC Not Yes Focus related to RI and priorities of the EUSDR

EIT KIC InnoEnergy Not Yes Focus related to RI and priorities of the EUSDR

Enterprise Europe Network (EEN) Yes Yes Focus on RI

EUREKA Network Not Yes Focus on RI

European Cluster Alliance (ECA) Yes Yes Focus on RI

European Biofuels Technology Platform Not Not No specific focus on the region

European Innovation Partnerships Not Not No specific focus on the region

European Institute of Technology and Innovation (KICs) Not Not No specific focus on the region

European Spatial Observation Network (ESPON) Not Not No specific focus on the region

European Technology Platforms Not Not No specific focus on the region

European Territorial Cooperation Transnational Cooperation Programme: Alpine Space

Not Not Covering only a marginal part of the region

European Territorial Cooperation Transnational Cooperation Programme: Central Europe

Yes Yes Covering an important part of the region


89

European Territorial Cooperation Transnational Cooperation Programme: Mediterranean Sea Basin (ENPI CBCMED)


European University Association (EUA) Not Yes Focus related to RI

Expert Council at the Ukrainian Part of the EU-Ukraine Cooperation Committee Working Group on the Development of the Danube Region

Not Not Covering only a marginal part of the region, no specific focus on RI

Ministerial Commissioner for the EU Danube Strategy of Hungary

Yes Not No specific added value for the report

Hungary - Slovakia Cross-border Co-operation Programme Not Not Covering only a marginal part of the region

Hungary - Slovakia Cross-border Co-operation Programme Not Not Covering only a marginal part of the region

Hungary-Croatia IPA Cross-border Co-operation Programme Not Not Covering only a marginal part of the region

Hungary-Romania Cross-Border Co-operation Programme Not Not Covering only a marginal part of the region

Hungary-Serbia IPA Cross-border Co-operation Programme Not Not Covering only a marginal part of the region

Hungary-Slovakia-Romania-Ukraine ENPI Cross-border Cooperation Programme


International Association for Danube Research Yes Yes Important tracks in research in the region

JRC Danube Air Nexus (DBN) Not Yes, grouped with JRC Scientific Support

Focus related to RI and priorities of the EUSDR

JRC Danube Land and Soil Nexus (DLSN) Not Yes, grouped with JRC Scientific Support


JRC Danube Water Nexus (DWN) Not Yes, grouped with JRC Scientific Support



90

JRC Danube Bio-energy Nexus (DBN) Not Yes, grouped with JRC Scientific Support


Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development

(OECD)

Not Yes Important good practices in regional cooperation; focus on RI

Institute for the Danube Region and Central Europe (IDM) Not Yes Important tracks in research in the region

International Commission for the Protection of the Danube

River (ICPDR)

Not Yes Important tracks in research in the region

European Commission Joint Research Centre: Danube Innovation Partnerships, Scientific support for the EUSDR

Not Yes Focus related to RI and priorities of the EUSDR

Regional Cooperation Council (RCC) Yes Yes Important good practices in regional cooperation; focus on RI

Romania - Bulgaria CBC Not Not Covering only a marginal part of the region

Salzburg Forum Yes Yes Important good practices in regional cooperation

Salzburg Group Not Not The initiative ceased to exist

SEE-ERA.NET (PLUS) call management Not Not Too narrow focus

Slovak-Austrian cross-border cooperation programme Not Not Covering only a marginal part of the region

Slovenia - Hungary Cross-border Co-operation Programme Not Not Covering only a marginal part of the region

Southeast European Cooperative Initiative (SECI) Yes Yes Important good practices in regional cooperation

South-East European Cooperation Process (SEECP) Yes Not No specific added value for the report

Steering Platform on Research for the Western Balkan countries

Yes Yes Important good practices in regional cooperation; focus on RI

Steinbeis Danube Center Yes Yes Focus on RI, closely related to EUSDR


91

Ulm Follow-up Group Yes Yes Focus on RI, closely related to EUSDR

UNESCO Yes Yes Important good practices in regional cooperation; focus on RI

Urban Platform Danube Region (UPDR) Not Yes Bringing in the civil society aspect

Viadonau Not Yes Bringing in the civil society aspect

Vienna Economic Forum (VEF) Yes Yes Important good practices in regional cooperation

Visegrad 4 Cooperation (V4) Yes Yes Important good practices in regional cooperation

Visegrad Fund Yes Yes Important good practices in regional cooperation; focus on RI

Young Citizens Danube Network Yes Yes Important tracks in HEI cooperation

Water JPI Not Yes Focus related to RI and priorities of the EUSDR

Western Balkans Enterprise Development & Innovation Facility (WBEDIF)

Not Yes Important good practices in regional cooperation; focus on RI

Western Balkans Research and Innovation Strategy Exercise Facility (WISE Facility)

Yes Yes Focus on RI, closely related to the region

11 Annex II – List of Questions for the Investigation

11.1 First round of the investigation

Type of the initiative / programme / stakeholder

1. Which category does the initiative belong to?

EU

Government/ministry

International Organisation

Higher Education

Research Institute

Innovation Actor

Agency/Fund

Association/NGO

Danube Region local organisation

Network

Company

Other:

2. Date of establishment/creation

3. Main goal, objective of the initiative

4. Scope of the initiative

Regional

Transnational/cross-border

European

International

5. Geographical coverage - target countries if any

6. Targeted field – multiple selection

Research

Innovation

Education

Other:

7. Type of participants the initiative represents – multiple selection

policy makers

programme owners/managers

intermediaries

universities/colleges

research institutes

industry

SMEs

other

8. Does the initiative target any scientific areas?

Yes – multiple select

Health

ICT


93

Biotechnology, food, agriculture

Nanotechnology, manufacturing

Energy

Transport

Environment, climate change

Social sciences and humanities

Security

Space

No

The main priorities of the organization/initiative:

9. Five main outcomes of the initiative in the past years; main priorities and successes:

10. Good practices/success stories identified which could be transferred to other

programmes/initiatives within the Danube Region:

11. Main targets for the following period?

Links to other stakeholders, possible synergies

12. Any cooperation with other stakeholders which play a relevant role in the Danube region:

If relevant, names of the stakeholders

13. Possible synergies with other programmes/initiatives taken into consideration when

formulating the programmes

Self-evaluation of the initiative

14. Opinion of the respondent regarding the following statements; disagree; agree; strongly agree;

or don’t have any idea

Positive results of the initiative are visible and measurable

The programme has led to huge interest among target groups

The initiative contributes to deepening regional cooperation

The projects are by far too small to have a visible impact

Lack of political will and/or funding limits the outcomes of the initiative

Low efficiency: high administrative burdens and costs for minimal output and impact

We are aware of synergies with other programmes which we intend to exploit as much as

possible.

11.2 Second round of the investigation – interview guide

As regards the main priorities of your organization/initiative,

1. Could you tell us about the main priorities?

2. What have been the five main outcomes of your initiative in the past years?

3. Have you identified any good practices/success stories which could be transferred to other

programmes/initiatives within the Danube Region?

4. Do you have or do you envisage to have any actions to foster the creation of triple or quadruple

helix?

a. Do you target SMEs/start-ups with your actions?

b. What is your relation to government/public authorities?


94

c. Do you have any connections with public research institutions/universities? Do you

consider them as the target group of your actions?

5. Could you please tell us the main targets for the following period? Is there a document in which

we can learn about these targets available?

Links to other stakeholders, possible synergies

1. Do you have any cooperation with other stakeholders which play a relevant role in the Danube

region?

a. If yes, please give the names of the stakeholders

2. During the formulation and articulation of your programmes do you build upon possible

synergies with other programmes/initiatives? If yes, please specify.

3. What steps could and shall be taken to strengthen synergies among various initiatives in the

Danube region in your opinion?

Impact assessment of the initiative

1. Visibility

a. How would you describe the visibility of your initiative? How many

people/organizations have you reached in 2015?

b. How do you reach the public with your results? Which dissemination activities do you

use?

c. Have you used satisfaction questionnaires? If yes, what have been the results?

2. Results/impacts of your initiative

d. What have been the measurable results of your initiative? Number of projects

generated, number of programmes launched, number of conferences organized, etc.

e. Does your initiative contribute to deepen regional cooperation? If yes, how do you

measure it? Number of regional conferences organized, etc.

f. What are the main obstacles you have identified which limit the outcomes of your

initiative? – Lack of political will, lack/insufficiency of funding, high administrative

burden, lack of international partners, etc.


95

12 Annex III – List of Interviews

Organization Contact Person Date

Danube Universities Csilla Csapó 08. 09. 2014.

Ministerial Commissioner for EUSDR, Hungary

Antal Ferenc Kovács 10. 09. 2014.

EURADA Christian Saublens 10. 09. 2014.

Danube Chambers of Commerce Association Littvay-Kovács Áron 11. 09. 2014.

Vienna Economic Forum Erhard Buzek 24. 09. 2014.

UNESCO Mario Scalet 14. 10. 2014.

WISE, HR Ministry of Science and Education Kristina Ferara Blašković 15. 10. 2014

Council of Danube Cities and Regions Peter Langer 16. 10. 2014.

CEEPUS Elisabeth Sorantin 21. 10. 2014.

Danube Rectors Conference Michal Lošťák 21. 10. 2014.

DanuClus Sigrid Winkler 19. 11. 2014.

International Commission for the Protection of the Danube River (ICPDR)

Raimund Mai 29. 01.2016.

Urban Platform Danube Region Jörg Mirtl 01. 02. 2016.

Institute for the Danube Region and Central Europe

Erhard Busek 02. 02. 2016

Steinbeis Danube Center Jürgen Raizner 03.02.2016

OECD Southeast Europe Programmes Alain Paic 04.02.2016

Central European Service for Cross-Border Initiatives (CESCI)

Gyula Ocskay 09.02.2016

WBEDIF Huber Cottogni 11.02.2016

JRC EUSDR Scientific Support Miroslav Veskovic 15.02.2016

European University Association Lidia Borrel Damian 28.02.2016


96

13 Annex IV: Lists of participants

13.1 1st Stakeholders’ Workshop

Time & Venue: 8 June, 2015, Budapest, Hungary

13.1.1 Agenda

Enhancing synergies in research and innovation programmes in the region

2015-06-08

Budapest, Hungary

09:30 - 10:00 Arrival and welcome coffee

10:00 - 10:10 Welcome and objectives of the event by Béla Kardon (RCISD)

10:10 - 10:25 Overview of activities and achievements of the Danube-INCO.NET by Elke Dall (ZSI)

10:25-10:40 Presentation of the report including synergies and recommendations with a special emphasis on R&I and educational activities, possible joint programmes and dialogue within and beyond the triple helix by Virág Zsár (RCISD)

10:40-11:30

Presentations by selected stakeholders with a special emphasis on the following aspects:

- characteristics of the initiative/organization - coordination at various levels (regional, national, international) - combining different funding sources and instruments - influence of the EUSDR - joint activities envisaged - dialogue within the triple helix

(1) Update on the Research and Innovation dimension of the SEE 2020

Strategy by Mladen Dragasevic, Representative of Regional Cooperation Council

(2) Western Balkans Regional R&D Strategy for Innovation and Priorities for the Western Balkans by Kristina Ferara Blaskovic, Representative of WISE

(3) Bringing intellectual power together: the cooperation of universities in the Danube region by Michal Lostak, Representative of Danube Rectors Conference

(4) Promotion of Science and Transfer of Technology by the Central European Initiative: Pilot Activities of the CEI-PRAISE Programme and beyond by Sergiu Porcescu, Representative of the Central European Initiative (CEI Praise)

(5) CEEPUS as an Example of Decentralized Organization by Elisabeth Sorantin Representative of CEEPUS

5x10 min. presentations

11:30-11:45 Coffee Break & Networking


97

11:45-12:25

Presentations by selected stakeholders with a special emphasis on the same aspects as above:

(6) Financing possibilities at the International Visegrad Fund by Ferenc Jári,

Representative of Visegrad Fund

(7) Project Danube Universities for sustainable energy competence by Csilla

Csapó, Representative of Danube Universities

(8) The role of UNESCO in STI policy and R&D: current approaches and

priorities in the region by Marie Prchalova, Representative of UNESCO

(9) Cooperation Among Member States of the Organization of the Black Sea

Economic Cooperation (BSEC) in the Field of Science and Technology by

Bratislav Dordevic, Representative of the Black Sea Economic Cooperation

(BSEC)

4x10 min. presentations

12:25-13:00

Conversation in knowledge cafés around the following topics

- Which factors and tools can support the dialogue among the triple helix? How could this be reinforced in the region? What could your organisation do with this regard?

- What kind of tools could support the harmonisation of various programmes of regional stakeholders? What could your organisation do with this regard?

- Which means would be needed to broaden the scope of current cooperation or to run joint programmes among regional stakeholders? What could your organisation do with this regard?

13:00-13:20 Follow-up of knowledge cafés

13:20-13:30 Conclusions, future steps

13:30-14:30 Working Lunch

Venue

The venue of the event will be the Institute for Foreign Affairs and Trade.

Address: Bérc Street 13-15, 1016 Budapest.

13.1.2 List of participants

Name Organization

Ambassador Mr Bratislav Dordevic

Black Sea Economic Cooperation (BSEC) PERMIS

Dr Davor Kozmus Ministry of Education, Science and Sport, Slovenia

Dr Michal Lošťák Czech University of Life Sciences Prague Danube Rectors Conference

Dr Mirjana Lenhardt Institute for Multidisciplinary Research, Serbia


98

Dr Sinisa Marcic Ministry of Science and Technology of the Republic of Srpska, Bosnia and Hercegovina

Dr Ulrike Kunze DLR Project Management Agency

Dr. Ales Gnamus European Commission, JRC-IPTS

Dr. Antal Nikodémus Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade

Mr Bardhyl Tushi Ministry of Education and Science, Macedonia

Mr Bujar Gallopeni Ministry of Education, Science and Technology, Kosovo

Mr Csaba Lay Pallas Athéné Domus Innovationis Fund

Mr Draganco Apostolovski CEI Deputy National Coordinator for Macedonia

Mr Ferenc Jári Visegrad Fund

Mr Geron Kamberi National Agency for Research , Technology & Innovation, Albania

Mr Sergiu Porcescu Central European Initiative (CEI) Praise

Mr Jürgen Raizner Steinbeis Danube Centre

Mr Marius-Valentin Niculae Danube Transnational Programme 2014-2020

Mr Mladen Dragašević Regional Cooperation Council (RCC)

Mr Sándor Szigeti independent expert

Mr Thomas Karafiat EDVConsulting, Karafiat KG

Ms Ágnes Szmolenszky Bay Zoltán Nonprofit Ltd. for Applied Research

Ms Alma Hasanovic Ministry of Civil Affairs, Bosnia and Herzegovina

Ms Csilla Csapó Danube Universities

Ms Kristina Ferara Blaškovic Western Balkans Innovation Strategy Exercise (WISE) Facility

Ms Mag Elisabeth Sorantin Central European Exchange Program for University Studies

Ms Marie Prchalova United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization

Ms Mimika Loshi Regional Cooperation Council (RCC)

Ms Orsolya Jánosik Bay Zoltán Nonprofit Ltd. for Applied Research

Ms Pavlína Janová Office of the government of the Czech Republic

Ms Petra Perényi Hungarian Rectors’ Conference

Ms Tania Friederichs European Commission, DG Research and Innovation, Directorate C on International Cooperation

Ms Violeta Atanasovska Ministry of Education and Science, Macedonia

Ms Željka Dukić Ministry of Education, Science and Technological Development, Serbia

Prof Damir Jeličić Ministry of Science, Education and Sports, Croatia

Prof Dr Djuro Kutlača “Mihajlo Pupin” Institute (IMP)

Prof Miroslav Veskovic DG Joint Research Centre

Prof. Dr. Mr. Hans-Jörg Fecht Danube Academies Conference

Prof. Dr. Viktor Nedović Ministry of Education, Science and Technological Development, Serbia

Prof.dr.sc. Ivan Pejić Western Balkans Innovation Strategy Exercise Facility

Ms Elke Dall Centre for Social Innovation (ZSI)

Ms Ines Marinkovic Centre for Social Innovation (ZSI)

Dr Béla Kardon Regional Centre for Information and Scientific Development (RCISD)

Ms Virág Zsár Regional Centre for Information and Scientific Development (RCISD)


99

Ms Ildikó Dorogi Regional Centre for Information and Scientific Development (RCISD)

Ms Zsuzsanna Csornai Institute for Foreign Affairs and Trade (IFAT)

13.2 2nd Stakeholders’ Workshop

Time & Venue: 30 October, 2015, Ulm, Germany

13.2.1 List of panellists

Name Organization

Viktor Nedovic EUSDR PA7 SG coordinator, Ministry of Education, Science and Technological Development, Serbia

Karl-Heinz Bechtle EUSDR PA8 SG coordinator, Ministry of Finance and Economics Baden-Württemberg

Matthias Hack Ulm Follow-up Group

Ágnes Dobrotka Danube Chambers of Commerce Association (DCCA)

Alan Paic Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD)

Zita Majoros Entreprise Europe Network (EEN), Hungarian National Trading House

Marius-Valentin Niculae Danube Transnational Programme (DTP)

Elisabeth Sorantin CEEPUS

Hans Gäng Danubiz

Raimund Mair International Commission for the Protection of the Danube River (ICPDR)

Pitlová Lubica INT VET Erasmus+ project, Chief State Counsellor Higher Education, Science and Technology Division

Javier Casado Hebrard TRAFOON project, University of Hohenheim

Jürgen Raizner Steinbeis Danube Centre

Date post:	15-Jun-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	21 times
Download:	0 times

D2.9 Mapping of relevant stakeholders describing ...€¦ · Mapping of relevant stakeholders...

Documents