“Mario Draghi paints a clear picture that we in the EU need to be much more focused and carefully select areas that we want to invest more in – and in a much more targeted fashion. According to Draghi, the EU’s competitiveness is so challenged that, without action, we will have to either compromise our welfare, our environment or our security,” says Josephine.

Fast track!
Supported by solid data, Draghi highlights many issues, not least the fact that Europe has so many amazing researchers and knowledge institutions, but that we get too little out of the knowledge they create, among other things because we have problems linking knowledge institutions with business and industry. He also points out that levels of investment in research and innovation in Europe are far too low compared to the USA.Unless the EU is able to very significantly boost its budget, the fields of research the EU can invest in will have to be carefully prioritised. And Draghi makes no secret of the fact that the EU’s future competitiveness must be driven by technological innovation.

At the same time, there is a need to speed up! The EU’s main competitors are China and the USA. In China, strategic decisions can be made and implemented extremely quickly due to the Chinese political system, and in both countries without the same regulation of, e.g., state subsidies and security. But what do you do when the EU has a tradition of and values democracy, fair competition and participatory decision-making processes – and when 27 member states and the European Parliament have to agree on initiatives and programmes? Josephine is appreciative of Draghi’s points, but at the same time sees a great and difficult challenge in the desire for faster and more long-term and durable decision-making in the EU: “The question is whether we can fundamentally adjust the paradigms and processes enshrined in the Treaty, which are foundational to the EU, without a fundamental breach of our values?”

Neither Enrico Letta nor Mario Draghi has all the answers – but according to Josephine, it is clear that the European Commission has tried to give it a shot with its July package of proposals for the next programming period, including an FP10 programme closely linked to a new large EU Competitiveness Fund.  This is no coincidence – and it is a clear signal to the research community.

Innovation, focus and impact
In the Draghi report, ‘innovation’ is a keyword, while there are fewer references to ‘research’. Whether this is because Draghi may see innovation as more or less synonymous with strategic, targeted research is unknown, according to Josephine, but innovation is what Draghi clearly advocates. Much better innovation ecosystems are needed for research to connect better and faster with business and industry, and ultimately produce more competitive products and services. The EU must think in terms of fewer, but larger and joint innovation projects in the technological and digital fields. And we must give EU companies affordable access to shared technological infrastructures as a prerequisite for their innovation. As Josephine sees it, Draghi’s key message is that the EU countries must start acting more like a cohesive unit, where everyone cannot necessarily expect to get back what they contribute to the common EU budget, but where we can make sure that as a single unit we possess exactly the strategic capabilities we need together. 

She points out that Draghi’s report in this way is aligned with the Letta Report, which recommends stronger European research and technology collaboration to ensure that European companies are better able to exploit the EU’s enormous reserves of knowledge, bright minds and entrepreneurs. According to Letta, the EU’s single market urgently needs a ‘fifth freedom’, the free movement of knowledge to enhance research and innovation – complementing the freedom of movement for goods, services, capital and people. Because research and innovation are key to creating a future we can live with.

Quite apart from the fact that the two reports are well worth reading in themselves, Josephine believes that researchers and advisers at the universities will benefit from reading them, as they provide an understanding of the EU mindset and visions/wishes for research. These are the narratives addressed by the recommendations for the FP10 and the Competitiveness Fund – and this is the agenda that must be kept in mind at a meta level in applications from now on. In much the same way that the gender issue became particularly important to address at one point, it is now the EU’s lagging competitiveness that must be addressed – more or less directly. A positive focus on impact is always a must, but may become increasingly important as the EU has to focus its investments. “Research has always been important to the EU, and the framework programmes have been very comprehensive. But we may be looking into a future where political leaders in the EU will have to direct their funding more specifically towards certain research fields and priorities. “What does my research project have to offer to Europe?” I think it’s important to bear this in mind when applying for EU funding. And fortunately, we’re quite good at doing so already,” says Josephine Them Parnas.

Useful links:

Draghi Report – introduction and download option

Introduction to the Draghi Report. (in Danish)

Letta Report. 

Introduction to the Letta report. (in Danish)

Draft budget, FP10 and Competitiveness Fund (July 2025):: EU budget 2028-2034