As I sit down to write this article, I find myself reflecting on the recent influx of position papers submitted by various stakeholders in the lead-up to the development of the next Framework Programme for Research and Innovation (FP10). I have been closely following these discussions, and I must admit that I am both encouraged and concerned by what I have seen. 

On the one hand, it is heartening to see that there is a broad consensus among institutions on the need for a substantial increase in the budget for FP10. According to the impact metrics derived from the position papers, a staggering 80% of the institutions strongly advocate for a significant budget increase, with many calling for a figure of €200 billion or higher. This level of support is a clear indication of the importance that the research and innovation community places on the future of European science and technology. 

However, as I delve deeper into the specific priorities and strategies outlined in these position papers, I cannot help but notice the lack of cohesion and alignment in the overall vision for FP10. One of the most striking examples of this is the limited emphasis placed on the integration of Social Sciences and Humanities (SSH) with STEM disciplines. Only 53% of the institutions strongly advocate for interdisciplinary collaboration, while the remaining 47% express moderate support. This is a concerning trend, given the increasing recognition of the critical role that interdisciplinarity plays in addressing complex societal challenges. 

Another area where the position papers fall short is in their lack of detailed strategies for measuring the impact of funded research projects. A mere 20% of the institutions strongly advocate for the development of comprehensive impact assessment mechanisms, while 60% express moderate support, and 20% provide limited or no discussion on this topic. This is a significant oversight, as the ability to demonstrate the tangible benefits of research and innovation is crucial for building public trust and support for continued investment in these areas. 

As I reflect on these findings, I cannot help but feel a sense of urgency and responsibility. As leaders in the research and innovation community, we have a duty to address these fractures and work towards a more cohesive and coordinated vision for FP10. This will require a concerted effort to prioritize interdisciplinary collaboration, impact assessment, public engagement, and a range of other critical issues. 

I believe that by leveraging our expertise and resources, and by actively engaging with policymakers and stakeholders, we can help to shape a brighter future for European research and innovation. But we cannot do this alone. It will require a collective effort from all stakeholders, including universities, research organizations, industry associations, and policymakers, to bridge the gaps and find common ground. 

The stakes are high, and the challenges are great. But so too are the opportunities. If we can come together and work towards a coherent vision for FP10, I believe that we can unlock the full potential of European research and innovation and drive meaningful progress for the benefit of all. 

As I conclude this article, I am reminded of a quote from the renowned scientist Marie Curie: “Now is the time to understand more, so that we may fear less.” Let us take these words to heart as we navigate the fractures and work towards a brighter future for European research and innovation.