Deliverable 6.4
Grant Agreement n° 311780
THEME [INCO.2012-1.3]
INCONET – Mediterranean Partner Countries
Deliverable N.: D6.4
Title: Report on Instruments and Joint actions to improve
mobility in the Mediterranean region
Funding scheme: Coordination and support action
Project Acronym: MEDSPRING
Project Coordinator: CIHEAM-IAMB, Claudio Bogliotti
Grant Agreement n°: 311780
Author: CNR, M. Rossano – S. De Luca; CSIC, R.R.Clemente
Dissemination level: PU
Coding: MEDSPRING/WP6/D6.4/V2/Mobility
Official delivery date: M40
Project start: 1 February 2013
Project duration: 48 months
1
Deliverable 6.4
Grant Agreement n° 311780
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Summary
pag.3
1. Rationale of the initiative
pag.3
1.1 Main objective
pag.3
1.2 Methodological outline and description of the activities
pag.3
2. Mediterranean Area and Mobility patterns: convergence and perspectives
2.1 Some common features
pag.4
pag.4
2.2 Barriers to mobility
2.3 Factors spurring Euro-Med Mobility
pag.6
2.4 Innovation paths
pag.8
2.4.1 Recent policies and instruments to enhance mobility and innovation
in the Med Region
pag.10
2.5 Innovative mobility schemes and their relevance in MED-SPRING
societal challenges
pag.19
3. The survey: best practices and useful tools to improve innovative mobility
schemes in the Euro-Mediterranean area
pag.20
3.1 Mobility patterns in the Mediterranean area
pag.20
3.2 Suggestions for innovation
pag.21
3.3 Proposals for enhancing specific EU-MPC Industrial Mobility Schemes
pag.22
4. A roadmap to foster mobility
pag.23
4.1 General recommendations for addressing future challenges
5. Lists of Figures and Tables
pag.23
pag.26
6.1 List of Figures
pag.26
6.2 List of Tables
pag.26
6. References
pag.27
7. Annexes
pag.29
7.1 The Mobility Questionnaire
pag.29
2
Deliverable 6.4
Grant Agreement n° 311780
Summary
The aim of the report is to provide results of the activities carried out in the frame of MEDSPRING–
WP6 project dealing with mobility issues. They take stock of the instruments and programs at EU
and national level; collect data on gender issues, barriers to international and inter-sectoral
mobility; outline best practices based on international projects with the final goal to suggest actions
in the short and medium long term for enhancing innovative mobility schemes. The roadmap for
actions, drafted and agreed by partners, takes into account some of the main literature on this
subject-issue, the results of an ad-hoc survey and the recommendations agreed during the Third
Euro-Med Inter-Institutional meeting of MEDSPRING (27 April 2016).
1. RATIONALE OF THE INITI ATIVE
1.1 MAIN OBJECTIVES
Through the WP6 Task 4, MED-SPRING aims at raising attractiveness of the MPCs to achieve a
more balanced mobility in the Euro-Mediterranean region and foster knowledge and technology
share stimulating joint (EC, MS, AC, MPC) innovative mobility grant schemes.
Specific objectives are:
1. Exploring a different way to promote and implement mobility schemes, taking into account
industry demand and instruments to strengthen industry-academia partnership;
2. Raising awareness of the opportunities for mobility grants, implemented by Research
institutions, Universities, industries as well as by European Commission;
3. Propose ways to coordinate and implement joint innovative mobility patterns that could
have a real impact on socio-economic development of the region concerned.
1.2 METHODOLOGICAL OUTLINE AND DESCRIPTION OF THE ACTIVITIES
The task has been organized as follows:
a) A desk office work to identify and assess mobility schemes under-going in the EuroMediterranean region, including industry-academia mobility schemes, implemented by each
of Euro-Med Countries.
b) A survey to identify companies, universities and regional governments interested in
developing new projects for EU-MPC Industrial Post-graduate (or Doctoral) Plans on
specific cooperation priorities. The idea is to identify and propose pilot EU-MPC Industrial
Mobility Projects addressed to post-graduates from MPCs, covering training schemes
such as specialized courses, master studies or industrial doctorates. Each project may
include at least one training/mobility pattern for post-graduates in which EU and MPC
institutions (also Regional Governments), public private consortia and enterprises investing
on water, food or energy in the MPCs could be involved. This to spur Industrial Doctorate
and other training courses and Innovative Mobility Projects (IMP) designed by the
sponsoring organizations on the research priorities/needs and co-financed by one
3
Deliverable 6.4
Grant Agreement n° 311780
enterprise (EU or MPC) and by one European or MPC national fund or the regional
authority where the beneficiary industry is based in.
c) Proposals for specific EU-MPC Industrial Mobility Projects, taking care the industry
demand, the instruments to strengthen industry-academia partnership and innovative
mobility schemes.
In order to accomplish the task, the MED-SPRING third inter-institutional meeting, envisaged in the
frame of WP6 – Task 3, has been devoted to Human Capacity Building and Innovative mobility
schemes, to collect proposals, opinion of the experts on the collected data and finally draft a
common Euro-Med Action Plan on Mobility in R&I.
2. MEDITERRANE AN AR E A AND M OBI LITY P ATTERNS: CONVERGENCE AND PERSPECTIVES
Notwithstanding the results and the implementation of several instruments of EU to foster
international mobility in the Euro-Mediterranean area, the adoption from Member States (MS) of
the Scientific VISA facilitating access to EU MS of non EU researchers as well as the activities
carried out by international organisations, bilateral donors and NGOs to respond to the need of the
Med countries to have a knowledge-based economy, many factors still hamper mobility and
training of researchers in both EU and non EU Mediterranean region.
In fact, when extra-EU mobility is taken into account, the statistics show a decrease of the
percentage of mobile researchers. As will be illustrated in the following chapters, surveys also
show that language problems, difficulties to obtain visa and/or work permit, incertitude about career
are all important issues, while an important role for motivating international mobility is played by
profession-related benefits. Similar considerations are also expressed by some Mediterranean
Partner Countries representatives, who lament a lack of attention to home-grown innovations, the
need of bottom-up initiatives and the use of new technologies to empower research. 1 Another
issue, which appears to have significant effect on innovation, is the scarce mobility between public
and private bodies, due mainly to structural barriers and lack of incentives.
2.1 SOME COMMON FEATURES
Many studies carried out by projects co-financed by European Commission2, evidence that the
number of researchers who have worked or have been trained in a country other than the country
of origin are mainly males, with a PhD and a degree in Natural Science or Engineering 3 , as
illustrated in Figure 1. Those who moved in the first part of their careers, appear to increase the
1
I. Serageldin – “Share knowledge on line” – Comment. Vol. 490, 18.10.20012, p.333.
MORE - Study on Mobility patterns and career paths of EU researchers – June 2010 (1); MORE 2 – D.5 “Support for continued data collection and analysis concerning mobility patterns and career paths of
researchers” - Higher education sector report prepared by IDEA Consult for EC-DG Research, 2013.
3
See also: OECD EAS/STP/NESTI(2006)19/FINAL, Working Party of National Experts on Science and
Technology Indicators Revised Field of Science and Technology (Fos) Classification In The Frascati Manual
– 6/2 200.
3
A study on mobility of social sciences post doc shows that 52% of researchers make at least one
international move after their PhD and among them 67% accept a job in a third country. Ref: L. Von Bouwel:
“International mobility patterns of researchers and their determinants” 2010.
2
4
Deliverable 6.4
Grant Agreement n° 311780
probability of being mobile also later in life4. This is true for higher education institutions, public
research bodies, and private research institutions.
worked in industry
as student
mobile as student
Degree in Natural
sciences, Engin.,
Tech.
less than 40 years
old
Mobile researchers
% of males
100
80
60
40
20
0
with a postgraduate
degree
Mobile researchers (HEI survey)
Figure 1 - Mobility patterns of researchers in EU (training stage)
Source: MORE - Study on Mobility patterns and career paths of EU researchers – June 2010 (1)
When extra-EU mobility is taken into account, the statistics show a decrease, in general, of the
percentage of mobile researchers. However, they have the same characteristics highlighted above:
they are males, with a PhD and, for about 50% of the cases, a degree in Natural Sciences,
Engineering or Technology (this research group represent the 36% of researchers). Also the
distribution by age and gender is similar, with a peak in the age group 35/44 and a percentage of
about 35% for women and 65% for men.
Some data regarding job mobility, i.e. job changes in another country, according to the sector and
typology of post-graduate degrees are illustrated in Figure 2.
Internationally mobile researchers having moved to a
new employer in a different country
100
80
60
40
20
0
% worked in
industry as
student
% mobile as
student
% in Natural
Sciences, Engin.,
Tech.
% with a post
graduate degreee
% of males
% in total sample
HEI survey
RI survey
Figure 2 - Internationally mobile researchers having moved to a new employ in a different country.
Source: MORE - Study on Mobility patterns and career paths of EU researchers – 2010 (1).
5
Deliverable 6.4
Grant Agreement n° 311780
About the lesser extent of female mobility, it is important to underline that in reality the data reflect
quite well the proportion of female researchers in Europe; in fact while (as EU-28 average) women
represent 59% of graduates and 46% of PhD graduates, they represented only 33% of researchers
in 2009/20115. Moreover, beyond the European documents focusing on the relevant conditions for
female mobility, national programmes rarely attempt to tap this reservoir. Still in 2010, Trendchart
annual reports contained only one programme (VINNMER in Sweden) devoted to female mobility6.
Also in the gender case data don’t change if one takes in consideration non-EU countries and,
particularly, the Mediterranean area. Unhappily aggregate data for Med area are not available but
the average of female researchers in Africa is half point above the European percentage7.
Table 1: Gender by type of researcher (subgroup)
Gender
Female
Male
Total
EU researchers currently working abroad
35.4%
64.6%
100%
Non-EU researchers who have been to the EU in the past
34.3%
65.7%
100%
Non-EU researchers who have never been to the EU but who have been
to non-EU countries
Non-mobile non-EU researchers
34.6%
65.4%
100%
37.0%
63.0%
100%
Source: Author’s compilation based on MORE2 Extra-EU Survey (2012)
2.2 BARRIERS TO MOBILITY
According to the survey implemented in the frame of MORE2 project 8 , about 29% of non-EU
researchers have indicated that language was a difficulty faced when moving to the EU. A similar
share of researchers faced difficulties with respect to obtaining a visa or work permit (30%); finding
adequate accommodation (29%); and to a lesser extent, finding a job for their spouse (24%); and
maintaining their current level of remuneration (22%).
The challenges faced by non-EU researchers coming to the EU were eased by the host institution
(41%), by friends (31%) and to a lesser extent by the home institution (15%).
It’s interesting to note that, moving on a “perception” side, among non-EU researchers who had
been internationally mobile to another non-EU country but did not move to the EU, 66% considers
obtaining access to facility and equipment as being easy. Factors that are perceived as being
difficult when working in the EU are: finding a suitable research position (51%); obtaining funding
for research (52%); and finding a job (64%).
5
Eurostat - Gender analysis of researchers, 2012 - http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statisticsexplained/index.php/R_%26_D_personnel
6
A. Inzelt, Analysis of Researchers’ Mobility in the Context of the European Research Area – Expert analysis
of FP7 Mobility – 2010
7
UNESCO - UIS S&T Unesco fact sheet: women in science - December 2012 n° 23
8
MORE 2 D.5 -“Support for continued data collection and analysis concerning mobility patterns and career
paths of researchers” - Higher education sector report prepared by IDEA Consult for EC-DG Research,
2013.
6
Deliverable 6.4
Grant Agreement n° 311780
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
finding a
suitable
research
position
Figure 3 - Difficulties faced by non EU researchers
when moving to EU
Source: Elaboration based on MORE2 (2012)
obtaining
funding for
research
finding a job
Figure 4 - Difficulties perceived by non EU
researchers not moving to EU
The above data are in line with some of the results of another survey elaborated in the frame of a
project co-financed by 7FP (2007-2014) in the field of marine research specifically for the
Mediterranean region9 and here reported in Figure 5.
While in this survey the focus is more on general/political aspects representing barriers to mobility,
such as lack of coordinated strategies or of collaborative approach between the public and private
sectors, it also shows that language problems, difficulties to obtain visa and/or work permit,
incertitude about career are all important issues.
Other
3% 4%
4%
18%
Visa
4%
No career during mobility
7%
14%
Lack of regulation
9%
Language
Lack of information
10%
13%
14%
Lack of infrastructures/facilities
No acknowledgement HCB is a priority
issue
No coordinated strategies
Lack of collaborative approach
public/private
Lack of funds
Figure 5 – Problems and barriers for Mobility in Euro-Med Area
Source: SeasEra - New mechanisms for human capacity building in Mediterranean marine research.
Seas-Era project – www.seasera.eu. “New mechanisms for human capacity building in Mediterranean
marine research”
9
7
Deliverable 6.4
Grant Agreement n° 311780
2.3. FACTORS SPURRING EURO -MED MOBILITY
An important role for motivating international mobility is played by profession-related benefits, as
illustrated in Figure 6.
Professional-related motives for international
mobility
3,5
3
2,5
2
1,5
1
0,5
0
Career
Salary and other
opportunity at
financial
new location
incentives
Access to
internal and
expternal
research
facilties
Working with
leading experts
Career
progression
goals
Figure 6 – Professional-related motives for international mobility
Source: MORE - RI survey
Better financial and career prospects are the main factors spurring mobility of industrial
researchers; access to research facilities and improvement of personal research agendas have
instead a stronger effect on the decision of mobility of higher education and public centres’
researchers. The latter emphasize the prospect of patents and publications output, access to new
infrastructures, know-how, improvement of professional experience; this is mostly true as concerns
extra EU mobility.
What said leads to another issue, which appear to have significant effect on innovation: the scarce
mobility between public and private bodies, due mainly to structural barriers and lack of incentives.
Intra-sectorial mobility data show that private bodies tend to employ researchers from the public
sectors, and while they tend to cooperate with the public sectors of their own country, the
cooperation with the public sector of other countries is consistently less common. Considering the
issues linked to market and industrial pre-eminence, this fact appears quite natural. In the latest
years only innovative firms from Nordic Countries and some small European economies tended to
collaborate with academic partners abroad.
As far as Mediterranean Area is concerned, the aspects that seem to most affect the development
of Human Capacity Building (HCB) in research and innovation are the lack of well focused and
innovating international training programs and the weakness of common policies, the scarce
cooperation between research and industry as well as scarce coordination of national research
funding schemes (ref. Figure 7).
8
Deliverable 6.4
Grant Agreement n° 311780
Other
2% 4%
11%
Establishment of transnational institution
7%
International recogn. of training
7%
12%
Stronger inter-sectorial approach
9%
13%
10%
13%
Coordination of existing national training
programmes
Increased emphasis on mobility
Transnational training programmes
12%
Increased collaboration with industry
More coordination of national research
funding scheme
Creation of common policies
Stronger interdisciplinary approach
Figure 7 – Priorities to advance HCB in Med Area
Source: Seas-Era project- www.seas-era.eu
2.4 INNOVATION PATHS
Knowledge exchange and transfer play an important role in the advancement of research and the
dissemination of innovations; one of the best vehicles for knowledge diffusion is the mobility of
people between research institutions and different sectors of the economy. As consequence, the
mobility of individuals with doctorate degrees is a priority question from the perspective of sponsors
of PhD programmes whose objective is to maximise the social and economic benefit of their public
investment in training researchers. International mobility should also be considered as an
investment in human capital as it stimulates particular skills in the area of languages and cultural
and social abilities that are increasingly valuated in a globalizing world10.
There is a clear relation among the frequency of international collaboration on R&I and mobility
abroad for working purposes: 72% of the European researchers working outside the EU states or
having some form of research collaboration can be attributed to prior mobility experiences. A
similar outcome applies to the non-European researchers who had previously worked in the EU11.
In this perspective, post graduates are often viewed as creators of new knowledge who have the
potential to contribute to economic growth. Moreover, it is a fact that the international mobility of
students gives potential employers a good opportunity to attract the best and brightest candidates
with whom they have become acquainted through their networking activities.
Another point to be taken into consideration is the attention to get the best candidates or the most
appropriate ones. While the best ones simply are the most skilful, in the mobility context the most
appropriate implicitly take account of a missing knowledge at an organisation or in a country.
Hence the most appropriate candidate may not be skilled in specific subject issues or technologies
10
L.A.C Van Bouwel: International mobility patterns of researchers and their determinants -Summer
Conference 2010 on "Opening Up Innovation: Strategy, Organization and Technology"- Imperial College
London Business School, June 16 - 18, 2010.
11
See also MORE 2 project – “Support for continued data collection and analysis concerning mobility
patterns and career paths of researchers – Extra EU mobility report" .
9
Deliverable 6.4
Grant Agreement n° 311780
but be able to transfer, for past international experiences, models and methods to guide the
development of an invention through to commercialisation12.
Unfortunately, many barriers still prevent the emergence of a coherent research and innovation
dynamics capable of contributing even further to growth:
1. The absence of a globally harmonising and coherent framework,
2. The lack of “soft” use of knowledge,
3. High-Tech/Public Organisations bias13.
2.4.1 RECENT
MED REGION
POLICIES AND INSTRUMENTS TO ENHANCE
HCB
AND INNOVATION IN THE
Since the Cairo Declaration, resulting from the first Euro-Mediterranean Ministerial Conference on
Research and Higher Education (Cairo - June, 2007), which gathered all ministers concerned from
the EU Countries and Mediterranean Partner Countries, Training and Human Capacity Building in
the Euro-Mediterranean region is one of the main concern of European Union, as also emerged
during the Euro-Mediterranean Conference on Research and Innovation (Barcelona – 2/3 April
2012).
The EU-MPC S&T cooperation has been covered by a plethora of EU instruments, aiming at
fostering mobility and training on Research and Innovation. Among such instruments, the following
provided and may provide in future any support to enhance innovative mobility patterns in Higher
Education, Research and Innovation:
1. Tempus14, Erasmus/Erasmus for all
2. The Framework Program for RT&D (Marie Curie actions, INCO - IEF, ERG, COFUND, IRG,
IRSES and Policy Support actions in particular)15
3. The ENPI programme
4. The MED Programme
5. The EURAXESS "Researchers in Motion" mobility portal and other programs and platforms
to spur mobility in the MedRegion.
1. Tempus programme main objective is supporting modernisation of higher education in
Partner Countries outside Europe. By promoting the exchange of ideas and people across the
Mediterranean it also contributed to foster regional and Euro-Mediterranean cooperation. It had a
12
A. Inzelt - Report on researchers' mobility – op. Cit.
Jelel Ezzine et al., “Building competence for Research and Innovation: governance, human capital and
research infrastructure”- Working Papers for Barcelona Euro-Mediterranean Conference on Research and
Innovation - Barcelona, 2-3 April 2012.
14
Tempus promotes institutional cooperation between EU and Partner Countries of Eastern Europe, Central
Asia, Western Balkans, Mediterranean region. Mediterranean Partner Countries only joined the programme
in 2002, Israel in 2008, Libya in 2010. For the period up to 2012, a total budget of about 143 million Euros
attributed to this region including 87 million Euros (61%) for Middle East and 56 million Euros (39%) for North
Africa, as stated by Claire Morel (DG EAC) at the “EU-Southern Mediterranean dialogue on higher education
policies and programmes” launching event (July 2012).
15
See also Seas-Era Deliverable 5.2.1 Report on “Identifying needs, specificities and imbalances in Human
capacity Building.
13
10
Deliverable 6.4
Grant Agreement n° 311780
relevant role in the professional development of academic and non-academic staff and has served
as a useful tool for updating existing academic courses, while fostering links between Higher
Education and the Labour market. In fact, “many Tempus projects in the region included private
sector partners, from multinationals to local small medium enterprises. Local employers often sat
on the project steering committee and curriculum review panels and thus participated directly in the
curriculum design process”16
Some data on budget allocated in Mediterranean Countries are provided respectively by Table 2
and Figure 8.
Table 2: Total budget (in Mil. Euro) allocated by year for all Countries in the Southern Mediterranean Region
participating in the Tempus Programme (Tempus III and Tempus IV 2007-13)
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
22,5
21,5
18,5
18,0
14,0
12,7
22,7
12,7
24,0
25,3
29,6
Source: EACEA – The main achievements of the Tempus program in the Southern Mediterranean (2002-13)
TEMPUS: Breakdown of total budget committed by country
Syria
9%
Tunisia
11%
Algeria
9%
Egypt
25%
Palestine
5%
Morocco
19%
Lebanon
9%
Jordan
9%
Israel
3%
Libya
1%
Figure 8 - Breakdown of the Total Budget Committed by Country (2003-2014)
Source: EACEA–The main achievements of the Tempus program in the Southern Mediterranean (2002-13)
The Erasmus Mundus programme's objective is to contribute to the sustainable development of
third countries in the field of higher education, by promoting European higher education, favouring
the enhancement of career prospects, promoting intercultural understanding, in accordance with
EU external policy objectives.
Three Actions are envisaged:
16
EACEA – “The main achievement of the TEMPUS Programme in the Southern Mediterranean (20022013)”
11
Deliverable 6.4
Grant Agreement n° 311780
Act. 1 – Erasmus Mundus Joint Programmes (Masters Courses and Joint Doctorates)
Act. 2 – Erasmus Mundus Partnerships (former External Cooperation Window)
Act. 3 – Erasmus Mundus Attractiveness projects
In the first action, Algerian, Israeli and Lebanese Universities took part.
Each year, students worldwide can apply for Erasmus Mundus scholarships to Masters and
Doctorates. Students are selected by the individual consortia on the basis of a transparent
selection procedure. In total, 598 students from the Southern Mediterranean have been selected
over the 10 annual selections up to 2013.
Table 3: Total number of students per Country in MPCs in the frame of Erasmus
Mundus scholarships to Masters and Doctorates for the period 2004-2013
N. of Erasmus students
per Country (2004-2013)
Mundus Country
Country
N. of students
Algeria
50
Egypt
219
Israel
60
Jordan
23
Lebanon
45
Libya
2
Morocco
47
Palestine
27
Syria
39
Tunisia
86
Total
598
Source: EACEA – Erasmus Mundus in the Southern Mediterranean - June 2013
At the time being, the Erasmus Mundi Alumni Association is growing as numbers and range of
interests and appears that it will soon become an important international service club.
Under the Action n.2, Erasmus Mundus bring together HEIs from Europe on the one hand and
those from a particular region in the world on the other. The partnerships manage mobility flows
between the two regions for a range of academic levels – bachelors, masters, doctorate, postdoctorate – and for academic staff. Scholarships are awarded to the individuals taking part in the
mobility, and a portion of the budget is reserved to contribute to the costs of managing the mobility.
In the frame of 33 partnerships selected so far, they involve 308 participations by 103 different
HEIs from Southern Mediterranean, most of which from Egypt, as we can see by Figure 9.
12
Deliverable 6.4
Grant Agreement n° 311780
Figure 9 - Erasmus Mundus - Action 2 Partnership (2007-2012)
Source: EACEA – Erasmus Mundus in the Southern Mediterranean - June 2013
On the European side, the same partnerships have involved 267 instances of participation from
114 different HEIs in 21 different EU countries. Greatest participation was from universities in
France, Italy, Spain and Germany.
As part of the general considerations on the advantages arising from mobility experiences, the
Graduate impact survey 201417, shows that 57.84% of the participants think that their field of study
and their field of work match in the best way and that 16.09% of the participants found a job thanks
to contacts established during EM and 12.95% in companies where they did their internship or
master thesis. It is also true that among the participants who didn’t find a job, still a 10.31% is due
to an EM degree not recognized in the country they were looking for a job.
Under the Action n.3, Erasmus Mundus provides support to activities related to the international
dimension of all aspects of higher education, such as promotion, accessibility, quality assurance,
credit recognition, mutual recognition of qualifications, curriculum development and mobility. It also
disseminates the program results and examples of good practice.
17
http://www.em-a.eu/en/erasmus-mundus/graduate-impact-survey.html
13
Deliverable 6.4
Grant Agreement n° 311780
Figure 10 - Erasmus Mundus Impact
Source: EM Graduate Impact Survey 2014
2. During the Framework Programme for RT&D 2007-2014, the ERAWIDE calls are worth
mentioning as a mean to spur R&I cooperation in the euro-med region with the involvement of
stakeholders and industry representatives.
A successful experience that could be useful to establish partnerships and training programms also
with MPCs is represented by the REGIO projects implemented under 7FP The REGIONS OF
KNOWLEDGE programme was mainly designed to enhance inclusion of more regions into the ERA
and foster regional growth and competitiveness. In this frame, projects aimed at enhancing R&D
capabilities within existing regional research-driven clusters are predominant18. Due to improved
links between their stakeholders, they improved intra-regional communication and the strategic
focus of each region taking care of cluster initiatives, R&D capabilities and industry needs in the
regions concerned, for this reason they represent points of reference for further programmes and
projects including neighbouring countries, in particular when strategic focus is a similar or a
complementary one.
Transnational cooperation could be supported regionally/internationally whereas good practises
could be exchanged.
18
EC – “Assessment of the impact of the Regions of Knowledge programme” – Technopolis group-2011
14
Deliverable 6.4
Grant Agreement n° 311780
Table 4: REG-POT – MPC participation and innovation/mobility issues
Acronym - Title – Web site
Key words
Innovation and Mobility
patterns
BIODESERT - Biotechnology from desert
microbial extremophiles for supporting
agriculture research potential in Tunisia
and South Europe
Desertification,
Sustainable agriculture; Bioeconomy; Socioeconomic
development
Energy,
Capacity
building
Ref. Laboratory and techn.
platform. 4 international
expert researches for a 3
years PostDoc position and
1 for a 20 months.
Wastewater,
Nanoscience
technologies
e-learning platform for an Tunisia
online
course
on
nanotechnology applied to Morocco
water energy and health
RESSOL MEDBUILD - Research elevation
on integration of solar technologies
into Mediterranean buildings
SOWAEUMED - Network in solid waste
and water treatment between Europe
and Mediterranean countries)
www.uc.rnu.tn/sowaeumed_sousse/
ETRERA - Empowering Tunisian
Renewable Energies Research
Activities
www.etrera.eu/
MPC
Tunisia
Set up of a Renewable Jordan
energy Common Master
Program
Lebanon
Renewable energy,
5 Tunisian researchers, Tunisia
Energy storage, Fuel having study or work
cells
experience out of Tunisia,
recruited
Source: elaboration on www.cordis.europa.eu/
At the time being, the mobility programmes for “excellence” still remain the Marie SklodowskaCurie Actions, in the excellent science pillar, previously the People programme, specifically aimed
at supporting researchers at all stages of their careers19. They showed a certain increase of non
EU Med Countries participation, especially thanks to the IRSES (International Research Staff
Exchange Scheme, or RISE) scheme, aiming at reinforcing the extra-European dimension of ERA
through mobility, training and knowledge transfer. Recently the association Marie Curie Alumni
(MCAA) has been created for “…supporting a community of people with common experiences
providing a virtual meeting place and communication tools for networking, and a collective voice
via which the Marie Curie fellows can address the wider scientific and research community…”20.
Table 5: Researchers mobility in EU-Mediterranean area - Marie Curie actions (2007-2014)
Fellowship
Country
Algeria
Egypt
Jordan
Lebanon
Morocco
Palestine
Syria
Tunisia
In
0
5
1
2
6
1
0
1
Best
sender
BE
IT
DE
DE/IT/ES
ES
IT
Staff exchange
Out
28
63
11
44
26
4
17
45
Best
FR
receiver
DE
IT
FR
DE/UK
FR
AT
FR
In
41
189
102
1
263
43
Best
IT sender
DE
ES
(expected)
IT
UK
Out
113 FR
Source: Elaboration from EC - Marie Curie Actions countries fact sheets 7/11/2014
19
20
http://ec.europa.eu/research/mariecurieactions/index_en.htm
https://www.mariecuriealumni.eu/about-us
15
99
237
84
4
297
36
Best
ES
receiver
IT
ES
FR
FR
IL
129 FR
Deliverable 6.4
Grant Agreement n° 311780
Most of EC contribution for non EU Mediterranean Countries under the People programme of FP7
has been granted to Morocco, followed by Egypt, Tunisia and Jordan, as in Figure 11.
MCA in EU-MED area (2007-2014)
70
60
50
40
nr participant istitutions
30
eu contribution (100.000 euro)
nr researchers
20
10
0
Algeria
Egypt
Jordan Lebanon Morocco Palestine Syria
Tunisia
Figure 11 – FP7 Achievements: South Med Countries - Participation in Marie Curie Actions
21
Source: European Commission - Marie Curie Actions countries fact sheets 7/11/2014
MSCA also promote Business-Academic collaborations that focus on giving researchers adequate
skills and opportunities to contribute to SME and other business growth. It is clear that EU funding
programs should not have an end in themselves but can be an asset to support countries’
innovation policies.
3. ENPI/ENI - The European Neighborhood Instrument (ENI) supports the European
Neighborhood Policy since January 2007. The ENPI programme funded many important bilateral
and multilateral projects in the Med Area. Among its specific features:




21
22
Cross-border cooperation, under which the ENPI finances joint programmes, bringing
together regions of Member States and partner countries sharing a common border;
A Governance Facility which provides resources to creative partners which have shown the
will to carry forward essential reforms related to improving good governance;
The Twinning instrument, bringing together public sector expertise from EU Member States
and beneficiary countries with the aim of enhancing co-operative activities;
TAIEX (Technical Assistance and Information Exchange), jointly managed by EuropeAid
and the European Commission’s Enlargement Directorate-General, aiming to help foster
political and economic cooperation in a number of areas, primarily regarding the
approximation, application and enforcement of EU legislation.22
The number of researchers data refer only to fellowship.
https://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/funding/european-neighbourhood-and-partnership-instrument-enpi_en
16
Deliverable 6.4
Grant Agreement n° 311780
In particular, ENPI CBC Med or the on-going ENI CBC MED (2014-2020) is the multilateral crossborder cooperation "Mediterranean Sea Basin Programme". The main objectives of the policy
involve building deep and sustainable democracy, supporting inclusive and sustainable economic
growth, strengthening the Eastern and Southern regional dimensions and providing mechanisms
and instruments to support these objectives23. Issues such as regional development, environment,
climate change, transport infrastructure, public health and migration are of particular importance in
a trans-boundary context. R&I and human capacity building have a key role to foster social
innovation and promote economic development.
Among some of the recent projects funded by the programme to foster mobility and training, it is
worth mentioning MED-MOBIL, holding training seminars to help local institutions in promoting
exchange programmes for students, young professionals and entrepreneurs. Overall, 192 young
Mediterraneans from Egypt, Greece, Italy, Jordan, Lebanon and Palestine are going to benefit from
the pilot actions implemented by the project.24
Among projects to foster innovation through HCB, there is RDI programme (EU-Egypt), that played
a pivotal role in the implementation of capacity building and R&I initiatives in Egypt. The first phase
of RDI (2007-10) was funded by MEDA with a budget of €11 million. RDI II has been funded by the
ENPI (€20 million). It is focused on promoting research and innovation in specific sectors aligned with
both national and EU priorities and with the current trends of collaborative research, open innovation and
no-borders technology transfer to further support Egypt's move towards a knowledge-based economy.
The main aims are: fostering the Science and Innovation culture and environment; expanding
research collaboration between the R&D and business sectors; enhancing the impact of Egyptian
researchers' participation in EU funded programs; advancing Egypt's scientific and technological
capacity through supporting Centres of Excellence.
Another successful project for impact on applied research and innovation, human capacity building
and technology transfer is SRTD - Support to Research and Technological Development and
Innovation Initiatives and Strategies in Jordan - (SRTD I and SRTD II). The total allocated budget
for SRTD II is € 5,300,000 (EU Contribution is € 5,000,000 and Government of Jordan in kind
contribution (HCST) is € 300,000). SRTD II has four major components; Research Support,
Commercialization Support, administrative Support and the Key Areas of Water, Energy, Food and
Health.
4. The MED Programme promotes cooperation involving 13 States from the Mediterranean
coastal regions and it is centered on four main priorities:
 Promoting Mediterranean innovation capacities to develop smart and sustainable growth
 Fostering low carbon strategies and energy efficiency in specific MED territories: cities,
islands and remote areas
 Protecting and promoting Mediterranean natural and cultural resources
 A shared Mediterranean Sea.
23
24
http://www.enpicbcmed.eu/enicbcmed-2014-2020/reference-documents
http://www.medmobil.eu/news.php?id=13
17
Deliverable 6.4
Grant Agreement n° 311780
Figure 12 – The MED Programme
Source: http://www.programmemed.eu/en
MED Programme 2014-2010 is expected to grant a specific attention to coherence,
complementarity and transfer of experiences and practices that can feed transnational actions and
benefit of their results. It should provide more focus on synergies mechanisms; measurable results
and enhanced participation of private sectors than it did in the past. This will be done into specific
sectors related to the blue and green growth such as tourism, agriculture and agribusiness, marine
and environmental industries, energy, transports but also creative industries and social economy
that are especially important for the MED area. In these different sectors, one of the objectives is to
support stakeholders promoting innovation and help them organize and share experiences and
knowledge with structures from other regions and countries.

7. EURAXESS is an European Research Area (ERA) initiative providing access to a range of
information and support services for European and non-European researchers. It is composed of
four main sections, among these:
 EURAXESS Jobs is a recruitment tool without charges. Researchers can find updated
information on job vacancies, funding opportunities and fellowships throughout Europe.
Posting their CV will allow recruiters to find them. Companies or research institutes can
post vacancies and search for the CVs of international researchers.
 EURAXESS Services help researchers to plan and organise their move to a foreign
country. It covers issues such as accommodation, visa and work permits, language
lessons, social security and medical care.
Another web platform, highlighted as a challenge to delivering doctoral education in Africa is the
IDEA portal; it gives information about funding opportunities available to doctoral programme
administrators and graduate school managers from various funding agencies and their
programmes and projects. Moreover, among the plethora of mobility programmes, it deserves note
the MOY: the Mediterranean Office for Youth is a multilateral program that facilitates mobility of
students enrolled in Master and PhD in the Mediterranean countries. Grants are awarded to fund
academic mobility and to recognise academic excellence. Applicants must be nationals of a MOY
18
Deliverable 6.4
Grant Agreement n° 311780
member country25. They can spend at least one academic semester in at least one other institution
of higher education in a partner country other than that of the applicant home institution. Students
enrolled in or admitted to Erasmus Mundus WOP-P Master Program are eligible to apply for a
MOY grant. It is a fact that from a web survey (May 2015), on 177 scholarships granted, only few
are promoted by the Arabic countries.
2.5 INNOVATIVE
MOBILITY SCHEMES AND THEIR RELEVANCE IN
MED-SPRING
SOCIETAL
CHALLENGES
While there is a great deal of data on cross-border mobility of doctoral students, and in regard to
the ins and outs of EU area, data are not so exhaustive when analyzing researchers’ mobility with
regard to Med area, in particular. What emerges from the desk office on mobility issues is that the
majority of the mobility schemes data available for Med region are related someway to the three
relevant challenges of MED-SPRING project: Energy; High Quality Affordable Food; Scarcity of
resources. Several projects have been co-financed by European Commission on the above listed
issues and many initiatives have been carried on by Countries at national and international level.
Just for giving some examples of recent years, many of the projects financed under the FP7 REG
POT Program, which is not designed for Mediterranean area and not focused - in principle - on the
main issues above mentioned, involve MPC when dealing with food, desertification and energy. As
reported in the chapter 2, among the REG POT seven projects financed between 2011 and 2014,
four were focused on desertification, renewable energy, solid waste and water treatment and all of
them planned several mobility patterns at different levels, from the doctoral to the expert
researchers.
This confirms the important role on global socio-economic development related to MED-SPRING
societal challenges. On another way, it also witnesses the necessity to engage ourselves into an
all-encompassing approach if it is true that in spite of many efforts “promoted by the countries, the
European Union (Erasmus, Tempus, EuroMed Youth Programme, FP7) or by international
organizations (UNESCO, UNICEF, BM, FAO, CIHEAM, etc.), the general agreement on the
important role played by young people for the future of the Mediterranean both instruments and
funds to link international mobility to innovation path needs to be improved”26.
Important aspects to be considered are: inter-sectorial mobility, training/mobility schemes with a
successful impact (on employability, on R&I, on social issues and so on), possible attractor aspects
of med countries (strength/weakness analysis), mobility patterns and impact of non-technical
researchers (socio-economics, environment), existence and diffusion of interdisciplinary teams
dealing with themes connected.
25
Albania, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia, Cyprus, Egypt, France, Morocco, Greece, Italy, Lebanon, Malta,
Montenegro, Slovenia, Spain, Tunisia.
26
See also the Final Declaration of the Ministers of Agriculture – Palermo, 28.11.2014
19
Deliverable 6.4
3. THE
Grant Agreement n° 311780
SURVEY: BEST PRACTICES AND USEFUL TOOLS TO IMPROVE INNOVATIVE MOBILITY
SCHEMES IN THE EURO-MEDITERRANEAN AREA.
3.1. MOBILITY PATTERNS IN THE MEDITERRANEAN AREA
The survey has been realized between June and July 2015, on the basis of a questionnaire aimed
at gathering information on three main issues:
a) Recent and current mobility schemes
b) Suggestions to enhance mobility at both national and international level
c) Indication of some key-issues to foster innovative mobility schemes and in involve industry
representatives
The target was: MPC national contact points, clusters and technopoles representatives, experts of
international cooperation in ministries dealing with R&I from non EU Mediterranean countries. One
exception is represented by an Erasmus Mundi Alumni country coordinator, who gave us the point
of view of who take part in Euro-Mediterranean mobility.
Nearly 80 questionnaires (see model enclosed in the annex 7.1) have been sent. Unfortunately,
only 20% of the questionnaires returned duly filled in.
The majority of interviewed has been involved in mobility schemes academia/industry as well as
research/academia.
Several interesting data emerge from the survey:
1- The absolute majority of mobility schemes is related to groups of less than 5 people; only 2
cases present more than 10 people involved.
2- While the intra-sectorial mobility (academia-research-industry) presents some cases of
mobility at national level this option is absent in the academic – research mobility, as shown
in the Table n.6.
Table 6: Number of intra-sectorial mobility schemes in the Mediterranean Area.
Academia-ResearchIndustry mobility
National
International
Both
None
N.
Academia-Research mobility
2
6
3
2
National
International
Both
None
N.
0
7
5
1
Source: Author elaboration
3-None of the presented mobility scheme is totally based on national funds (and this probably
is the reason why no case of national academic mobility is considered); it appears that national
funds are used as a co-funding instrument. In the majority of cases (9 on 12) funds are from
EU, the others are one national bilateral fund (from an European country) and two USAID.
Among other funds aimed to improve mobility schemes at national or international level, the
following are mentioned:
20
Deliverable 6.4
Grant Agreement n° 311780
- Palestine : DFG (German Research Funds) for IC cooperation and PhD programs and MERC
(USA - Middle East Regional Cooperation Program) for researchers. EBIC network focused on
business start up with France and other European countries (2012/2015).
- Morocco : PHC Maghreb (Multilateral Maghreb France by CampusFrance), le CNRST Morocco,
EACID (Eurasia congress of infectious diseases). It’s also signaled a national Program of
Integrated Action and finance.
- Egypt : a national Science and Technology Development Fund, local funds from NGOs and
USAID.
- Tunisia : among funds at national level are considered PNRI and VRR programs, the first is a
governmental fund aimed to the development of research and technological innovation; the second
is a program aimed to the valorization of research results (exploitation to private sector and
awareness on protection needs: patents and licensing). Another apparently interesting program is
EU funded PASRI, a 12 million euro project in support to research and innovation with a focus on
industry and a measure aimed to doc and post doc intra-sectorial mobility.
3.2 SUGGESTIONS FOR INNOVATION
The interviewed emphasized the need to improve research infrastructures in MPCs; to easier
process for visa, enhance capacity building in financial management and reduce bureaucracy
burden both before the approval of the projects than in the management phase.
Other suggestions to improve the mobility in the euro-med area are linked to a more
comprehensive policy of research and innovation and to the importance of having more grants for
intra-sectorial cooperation, as well as more training focused on new development and equipments.
Interesting is also the idea of cooperative forums to discuss industry needs, funds and academic
interest and resources in promoting mobility as condition to raise attractiveness, funds to support
mobility program and as main element to build innovative mobility schemes.
Other suggested ingredients to build innovative mobility schemes are the selection of high motivate
personnel and the monitoring and the follow up of programs for a correct implementation of
cooperation strategies.
Innovative appears the idea of a sort of consortium between ministries, industries and universities
for an effective use of the outcomes of mobility programs.
Another suggestion is that the main element to build innovative schemes is the allowance for
scientists to spend their sabbatical year in industry and to receive part of the royalties that may
evolve by this collaboration, industry should also funds collaborative applied research with
academia. Similar is the idea of tax emulation for companies involved in scientific partnership with
universities, grants for researchers in mobility co industries, financial autonomy for universities.
Important, it’s said, is also to improve a new role of universities as levers of socio-economical
development and as such to develop activities as technology transfer, entrepreneurship, consulting
services and advanced training.
Another point of view says that to raise attractiveness is important “be individual not institutional”.
To build innovative schemes is important to assign master thesis on real industrial problems and to
strengthen industry-academia partnership is important to design common calls, set priorities in
cooperation with industry and enhance intra mobility.
21
Deliverable 6.4
Grant Agreement n° 311780
As far as the priority sectors are concerned, MED-SPRING priorities are very important in all the
considered areas and greatly in Palestine. Palestine depends on external funds near for everything
and cooperation with EU and USA at the moment is the only way to do, since the industrial sector
is very weak and the only resource is agriculture. This is the reason why are so needed incubators
that can help the creation of start up in food sector.
From the survey, it seems that only in Israeli experience intra-sectorial mobility has rather a bigger
impact than academic mobility.
Among the others, one person suggests that the slightly over bureaucratic and politicized
Mediterranean attitude doesn’t enable the education system to serve innovative and collaborative
needs of society to its best and that it is, consequently, important to set an adequate legislative
framework and involve more the industrial sector in scientific meetings in order to ease the set up
of partnerships.
All the interviewed underlined the importance of international collaboration both as cultural asset
and as support to innovation and economical sustainable development.
3.3. PROPOSALS FOR ENHANCING SPECIFIC EU-MPC INDUSTRIAL MOBILITY SCHEMES
In recent years, many Master classes have been organised in specific R&I activities including both
young researcher and entrepreneurs. On the other side, there are very few examples of
training/mobility of EU researchers to MPC industries or viceversa.
These actions could be useful to establish new international partnership and cooperation among
HE, Research (R) and Business, as illustrated in the figure below, while responding to some of the
challenges of a Global Knowledge Based Economy (GKBE).
If it is true that the three strands of the Triple Helix are treated as formally equivalent in the KBE
models, they are substantially very different as different are their processes and mechanisms. HE
and Research can be considered as the main carrier of the knowledge-based innovation system
(Godin and Gingras, 2000). Knowledge-based fluxes continuously upset and reform the dynamic
equilibria sought by the two other strands of the political economy27 with effects at national as well
as at the international level. Nowadays, at national level, many governments are spurring for a
regular involvement of universities and research centres in industrial innovation processes. This is
instead still at stake at international level, especially when this means staff exchange or mobility
27
L. Leydesdorff - The Knowledge-Based Economy and the Triple Helix Model - University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam
School of Communications Research (ASCoR), The Netherlands.
22
Deliverable 6.4
Grant Agreement n° 311780
patterns. In fact, two of the main barriers are related to measures to avoid brain drain and deal with
IPR issues.
In the frame of MEDSPRING survey, as well as during the Third Inter-institutional meeting, some
cases of Training for Young Entrepreneurs have been taken into account as examples that could
be a starting point of specific mobility schemes. Some EU projects have been co-funded to
enhance capacity building in food and water sectors, above all for vulnerable groups and for
women entrepreneurs. However no or scarce mobility schemes are envisaged. To combine
intersectoral with international mobility, a new instrument or a wise combination of those existing is
needed.
In the framework of the EUROMED Invest project, co-funded by EU, partners are going to organise
some Euro-Mediterranean Business Roadshow in Egypt and Jordan. These events, aimed at
meeting business & technology players, could be realized or replied at regional level or combined
and synergized with other H2020 projects, to favor cooperation opportunities with HE and
Research and design ad-hoc mobility schemes.
4. A ROADMAP FOR INNOVATIVE MOBILITY
Improving innovative mobility schemes and Human Capacity Building means intervening at
different levels: governance, higher education, research and innovation, infrastructures. Not
wishing to go in detail and in policies that are somehow out of the scope of this paper, the main
priorities to foster innovative mobility are:
--enhancing awareness of existing mobility grants,
--standardizing grants and research careers,
--reconsidering and improving VISA processes, notwithstanding the actual geo-political
situation
--set up measures to avoid the brain drain
--designing training programs responding to social and economic demand and involving R&I
actors, private entrepreneurs, SMEs and stakeholders
--favoring conditions for international cooperation and academia-industry partnership.
4.1 GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ADDRESSING FUTURE CHALLENGES
Innovation must be embedded in research and Human Capacity Building activities. To this aim,
most of the recommendations resulted from the report of European Commission “Mobility of
Researchers between Academia and Industry” 28 in 2006, are of outmost importance for the
Mediterranean area. To design a roadmap, some of these recommendations together with the
results of the survey and the MEDSPRING Third inter-institutional meeting on mobility, have been
taken into account.
The following seven actions (what to do) together with some suggestions to progress toward this
scope are listed below.
28
EC-Directorate General for Research - Mobility of Researchers between Academia and Industry - 12
Practical Recommendations - 2006
23
Deliverable 6.4
Grant Agreement n° 311780
a) Favoring training programs adapting to social and market needs
- Develop graduate and doctoral programs in partnerships with the business community,
including SMEs, as jointly developed programs will better suit future employers’ needs.
Industry involvement in defining and reviewing academic training programs could help
adapting them to the constantly changing market needs.
- Involve stakeholders in some joint cooperation activities may help to better understand the
impact on society.
b) Implementing training actions conducted with representatives of industry sectors
- Develop inter-sector mobility opportunities via staff exchanges, part-time positions,
sabbaticals, honorary positions, or financial or statutory incentives offered to both early
stage and established researchers.
- Develop the concept of consultancy by academic staff as one of the simplest ways for
academia to interact with industry and exchange research expertise.
c) Improving researchers career through appraisal of mobility
- R&I institutions should provide incentives for both international and inter-sectorial mobility
through internal academic appraisal systems and develop fair and transparent career
evaluation processes as recommended by the European Charter for Researcher and the
Code of Conduct for the Recruitment of Researchers29.
- The mobility academia-business has to be considered as a merit in the valorization of
Curricula in the Academia. Similarly, the association/membership to a cluster should be
considered as a merit for the academia groups, in order to have easier access to finance or
to obtain double function (research-industry) infrastructures.
d) Favoring conditions for academia-industry partnership
- Spurring actions providing jointly funded research grants and fellowships will foster
collaboration. Experience shows that companies (both large and SMEs), which contribute
financially to fellowships, tend to become more committed in the training of researchers,
involving them in core projects of the company. A starting point could be represented by
synergies of different projects or financial instruments of EU.
- Implement clusters.
- Develop informal networks and activities between SMEs and academia.
e) Enhancing capacity building on writing mobility international projects
- Implement measures and instruments for administration staff exchange
- Fostering Human capacity building on financial issues and contract negotiation
f) Sharing data and ensuring follow up of projects
- Implement national and international data-base on mobility of post-graduates, in particular
in sectors such as energy, water, high quality food.
- Define measures to ensure the follow up of projects involving mobility schemes
29
The Charter provides a framework of general principles and requirements for the roles, requirements and
entitlements of both researchers and their employers/funders. The Code of Conduct sets out some specific
guidelines around the recruitment of researchers. The Charter and the Code were formally adopted by the
Commission as a Recommendation on 11 March 2005, http://ec.europa.eu/eracareers/europeancharter/
24
Deliverable 6.4
Grant Agreement n° 311780
-
Develop standardized methods to assess the follow up of mobility patters.
g)
-
Implement measures to avoid brain drain
Creating a favourable R&I environment in MPCs
Provide reintegration phase in any mobility programme
More funding of MPCs in CO-FUND programme in MSCA actions could be useful to design
innovative mobility schemes, while avoiding brain drain.
Legenda:
actions that can be implemented in the short-run
in the medium run
in the long-run
25
Deliverable 6.4
Grant Agreement n° 311780
5. LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES
5.1 LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 - Mobility patterns of researchers in EU (training stage)
Figure 2 - Internationally mobile researchers having moved to a new employ in a different country.
Figure 3 - Difficulties faced by non EU researchers when moving to EU
Figure 4 - Difficulties perceived by non EU researchers not moving to EU
Figure 5 - Problems and barriers for Mobility in Euro-Med Area
Figure 6 - Professional-related motives for international mobility
Figure 7 - Priorities to advance HCB in Med Area
Figure 8 - Breakdown of the Total Budget Committed by Country (2003-2014)
Figure 9 - Erasmus Mundus - Action 2 Partnership (2007-2012)
Figure 10 - Erasmus Mundus Impact
Figure 11 - FP7 Achievements: South Med Countries - Participation in Marie Curie Actions
Figure 12 - The MED Programme
5.2 LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Gender by type of researcher (subgroup)
Table 2: Total budget allocated by year for all Countries in the Southern Mediterranean Region
participating in the Tempus Programme (Tempus III and Tempus IV 2007-13)
Table 3: Total number of students per Country in MPCs in the frame of Erasmus Mundus
scholarships to Masters and Doctorates for the period 2004-2013
Table 4: REG-POT – MPC participation and innovation/mobility issues
Table 5: Researchers mobility in EU-Mediterranean area - Marie Curie actions (2007-2014)
Table 6: Number of intra-sectorial mobility schemes in the Mediterranean Area.
26
Deliverable 6.4
Grant Agreement n° 311780
6. REFERENCES
(1) MORE - Study on Mobility patterns and career paths of EU researchers – June 2010
(2) MORE2 - Support for continued data collection and analysis concerning mobility patterns and
career paths of researchers - Higher education sector report prepared by IDEA Consult for EC-DG
Research, 2013
(3) OECD EAS/STP/NESTI(2006)19/FINAL, Working Party of National Experts on Science and
Technology Indicators Revised Field of Science and Technology (Fos) Classification In The
Frascati Manual – 6/2 2007
(4) L. Auriol, M. Misu, R.A. Freeman - Careers of Doctorate Holders: Analysis of Labour Market
and Mobility Indicators - OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers, 2013/04,
OECD Publishing - http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/5k43nxgs289w-en
(5) L. Van Bouwel - International mobility patterns of researchers and their determinants -Summer
Conference 2010 on "Opening Up Innovation: Strategy, Organization and Technology"- Imperial
College London Business School, June 16 - 18, 2010
(6) A. Inzelt - Analysis of Researchers’ Mobility in the Context of the European Research Area –
Expert analysis of FP7 Mobility – 2010
(7) Seas-Era project – www.seasera.eu. “New mechanisms for human capacity building in
Mediterranean marine research”; Report on “Identifying needs, specificities and imbalances in
Human capacity Building” - 2015
(8) I. Serageldin - Egypt: Share knowledge online - COMMENT, Vol 490, 18 October 2012
(9) J. Ezzine et al. - Building competence for Research and Innovation: governance, human capital
and research infrastructure - Working Papers for Barcelona Euro-Mediterranean Conference on
Research and Innovation - Barcelona, 2-3 April 2012
(10) http://www.em-a.eu/en/erasmus-mundus/graduate-impact-survey.html
(11) MORE 2 - Support for continued data collection and analysis concerning mobility patterns and
career paths of researchers–Extra EU mobility report - 2013
(12) EACEA – The main achievement of the TEMPUS Programme in the Southern Mediterranean
(2002-2013) - DOI 10.2797/18883 – Issue 15 – June 2013 http://eacea.ec.europa.eu/tempus/
(13) EC – Assessment of the impact of the Regions of Knowledge programme – Technopolis group
- 2011
(14) EACEA – Erasmus Mundus in the Southern Mediterranean - June 2013
(15) EACEA - EM Graduate Impact Survey 2014 – September 2014 - www.em-a.eu/.../
(16) http://ec.europa.eu/research/mariecurieactions/index_en.htm
(17) https://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/funding/european-neighbourhood-and-partnership-instrumentenpi_en
(18) http://www.enpicbcmed.eu/enicbcmed-2014-2020/reference-documents
(19) http://www.medmobil.eu/news.php?id=13
(20) http://www.programmemed.eu/en
27
Deliverable 6.4
Grant Agreement n° 311780
(21) Final Declaration of the Ministers of Agriculture – Palermo, 28 November 2014
(22) http://ec.europa.eu/eracareers/europeancharter/
(23) http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/R_%26_D_personnel
(24) UNESCO - UIS S&T Unesco fact sheet: women in science - December 2012 n° 23.
(25) MEDSPRING project - D6.3 - Report on the meetings for joint programming and financial
instruments – www.medspring.eu
(26) L. Leydesdorff - The Knowledge-Based Economy and the Triple Helix Model - University of
Amsterdam, Amsterdam School of Communications Research (ASCoR), The Netherlands
28
Deliverable 6.4
Grant Agreement n° 311780
7. ANNEXES
7.1 THE MOBILITY QUESTIONNAIRE
MED-SPRING QUESTIONNAIRE
“Mobility patterns in the Mediterranean area”
THE QUESTIONNAIRE
The questionnaire is addressed to MPC National Contact Points, Clusters and Technopoles
representatives, experts of international cooperation in ministries dealing with R&I.
Submission procedure: please send an e-mail with the annexed questionnaire filled-in at the
following address: [email protected] and cc: [email protected] no later than 6 July
2015.
DETAILS OF THE PERSON FILLING IN THE QUESTIONNAIRE:
Full name
Institution
Country
E-Mail
Phone numbers
1. Please provide relevant information about major ongoing mobility schemes involving your
Country representatives lasting more than 3 months and dealing with Innovation aspects:
1.1. Academia/Research–Industry cooperation
1.1.1
 Mobility patterns at national level
 Mobility schemes at international level
 with national funds  with EU co-funding
29
 with other funds
Deliverable 6.4
Grant Agreement n° 311780
1.1.2
Please select a mobility quantitative range:
 less than 5 training schemes
 between 5 and 10
 more than 10
1.1.3
Please provide 5 lines for 1–2 training schemes that - according to your experience – were
successful initiatives and explain why (impact on employability, on R&I, on social issues and
so on)
_________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
Countries involved __________________________________________________________
Programme and year of reference ______________________________________________
1.2 Academia/ /Research cooperation
1.2.1
 Mobility patterns at national level
 with national funds
 Mobility schemes at international level
 with EU co-funding
 with other funds
1.2.2
Please select a mobility quantitative range:
 less than 5 training schemes
 between 5 and 10
 more than 10
1.2.3
Please provide 5 lines for 1–2 training schemes that - according to your experience – were
successful initiatives and explain why (impact on employability, on R&I, on social issues and
so on)
_________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
30
Deliverable 6.4
Grant Agreement n° 311780
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
Countries involved __________________________________________________________
Programme and year of reference ______________________________________________
2. What do you think it could be relevant to raise attractiveness of your country to foster mobility?
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
3. Are you aware of funds at a national level to develop innovative process linked to mobility
schemes?  yes  not
If yes, please indicate one or more instrument or institution of reference.
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
4. Do you know about any possibility to use different programs and funds to improve intersectorial and/or innovative mobility schemes (national and international)? Could you provide some
example?
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
5. What are, according to you, the three main “elements” to build innovative mobility schemes
capable to create a link between research/academia and industry?
a._____________________________________________________
b._____________________________________________________
c._____________________________________________________
31
Deliverable 6.4
Grant Agreement n° 311780
6. Please list the R&I priorities (up to 3) that, according to your knowledge and experience, are
the most represented in mobility schemes and training patterns
a._____________________________________________________
b._____________________________________________________
c._____________________________________________________
7. As far as your Country is concerned,; how should you describe the mobility schemes related to
the MED SPRING priority challenges: Scarcity of Resources (particularly Water), Food, Energy?
(e.g. Good, adequate, to be improved, inadequate, please specify also a motivation)
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
8. Is there any aspect of your country research policy and/or research and innovation environment
that could be improved (mobility, cross border cooperation, academy-industry cooperation,
infrastructure, specific doctoral programs, etc.)?
(Please, select up to 3 points, and list them in order of relevance)
a._____________________________________________________
b._____________________________________________________
c._____________________________________________________
9. What else do you think could be done, generally speaking, to improve and strengthen industryacademia partnership and/or intrasectorial mobility with reference to the selected research fields
(Scarcity of Resources/Water, Food, Energy)?
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
10. If you want to elaborate one or more of your replies or make some related suggestion, please
do it (just insert the question number for reference)
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
32