Excellent response to first Priority 3 call

June 6, 2003

Brussels, 05 Jun 2003

There was a high response to stage one of the call for proposals for Priority 3, with a 17% success rate in the April 2003 evaluation. A workshop on 8 May clarified the main aspects for stage two proposals.

Over 400 proposals were received in response to the

first call (NMP-1)

for Priority 3, launched on 17 December 2002 and devoted to the new instruments – Integrated Projects (IPs) and Networks of Excellence (NoEs) – in the fields identified in section 3.4 of the December 2002 edition of the

work programme (PDF).

Priority 3 is the only thematic priority of FP6 to have organised the evaluation of proposals for Integrated Projects and Networks of Excellence in two stages. The closing date for the submission of stage one proposals was 6 March 2003. According to this two-stage procedure, only proposals retained in the first stage are allowed to submit complete stage two proposals.

Outcome of stage one IP and NoE proposals

The 406 proposals were split as 213 Integrated Projects and 193 Networks of Excellence, and 77 proposals were recommended for stage two. Submitted proposals involved 13 464 partners, with an average of 29 partners for Integrated Projects and 38 for Networks of Excellence. Industry accounted for just over a third of participants in Integrated Projects, with a remarkably high level of SME participation; universities and research centres provided the majority of partners in Networks of Excellence. Participation of EU accession and European Free Trade Area (EFTA) countries was consistent with previous calls and significant compared with GDP and populations.

Thematic Priority 3: Evaluation of new instruments – April 2003 (PDF).

Preparing stage two IP and NoE proposals

In line with the overall objectives of Priority 3, the retained proposals for stage two showed a potential for breakthroughs in Integrated Projects and for integrating capacities in Networks of Excellence.

Key requirements relating to industrial relevance, radical innovation and lasting integration must be defined precisely in stage two submissions. Proposers will have to find the right balance between 'promising the moon' and achieving tangible results in terms of new products, processes and services.

Two presentations given to the co-ordinators of the retained stage one proposals at a Commission workshop in Brussels in May 2003 support the work to be carried out to finalise complete stage two proposals. Although this information is presented as a 'reminder', it highlights important aspects of proposals and provides all interested parties with examples of the key elements required for retained stage one proposals.

Towards stage two proposals (PDF)

Thematic Priority 3: Evaluation of IPs + NoEs; 2nd Stage – July 2003 (PDF)

Participants in stage two proposals should also consult all relevant contractual information available on CORDIS. Where proposals involve ethically relevant issues, participants are invited to check here for further information.

Further information

DG Research
http://europa.eu.int/comm/dgs/research/i ndex_en.html
http://europa.eu.int/comm/research/indus trial_technologies/03-06-03_p3-reponse-1 stcall_en.html

You've reached your article limit.

Register to continue

Registration is free and only takes a moment. Once registered you can read a total of 3 articles each month, plus:

  • Sign up for the editor's highlights
  • Receive World University Rankings news first
  • Get job alerts, shortlist jobs and save job searches
  • Participate in reader discussions and post comments
Register

Have your say

Log in or register to post comments

Most Commented

James Fryer illustration (27 July 2017)

It is not Luddism to be cautious about destroying an academic publishing industry that has served us well, says Marilyn Deegan

Hand squeezing stress ball
Working 55 hours per week, the loss of research periods, slashed pensions, increased bureaucracy, tiny budgets and declining standards have finally forced Michael Edwards out
Jeffrey Beall, associate professor and librarian at the University of Colorado Denver

Creator of controversial predatory journals blacklist says some peers are failing to warn of dangers of disreputable publishers

Kayaker and jet skiiers

Nazima Kadir’s social circle reveals a range of alternative careers for would-be scholars, and often with better rewards than academia

hole in ground

‘Drastic action’ required to fix multibillion-pound shortfall in Universities Superannuation Scheme, expert warns