OpenLobby.EU
Explore

European University Association

EUA

The European University Association represents 850 universities across 48 countries, promoting university autonomy and coordinating European higher education and research policy.

Lobbying Activity

Meeting with Bogdan Andrzej Zdrojewski (Member of the European Parliament, Rapporteur) and Deutsche Industrie- und Handelskammer and

28 Jan 2026 · Stakeholder dialogue on establishing the Erasmus+ programme for the period 2028-2034

Meeting with Ana Vasconcelos (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur for opinion) and Institute for European Environmental Policy and

27 Jan 2026 · Performance Regulation

Meeting with Massimiliano Esposito (Head of Unit Research and Innovation)

28 Nov 2025 · Horizon Europe 2028/2034

Response to 2021-2024 Triannual evaluation of the six Executive Agencies

26 Nov 2025

The European University Association (EUA) is pleased to share the attached statement with some key considerations for the EC call for evidence on the EUs 2021-24 evaluation of the EUs 6 executive agencies, focussing on the European Education and Culture Executive Agency (EACEA). Which build upon EUAs detailed analysis and recommendations on Erasmus+, based on the experiences of 500 higher education institutions with the programme and the EACEA.
Read full response

Response to EU’s next long-term budget (MFF) – EU funding for cross-border education, training and solidarity, youth, media, culture, and creative sectors, values, and civil society

21 Nov 2025

The European University Association (EUA) is pleased to share the attached statement with key considerations for the EC consultation on the EUs next long-term budget (MFF) EU funding for cross-border education and training (), which build upon EUAs detailed analysis and recommendations on Erasmus+, based on the experiences of 500 higher education institutions with the programme.
Read full response

Meeting with Ann-Sofie Ronnlund (Cabinet of Commissioner Ekaterina Zaharieva)

18 Nov 2025 · University funding and innovation

Response to EU’s next long-term budget (MFF) – performance of the EU budget

12 Nov 2025

The European Commission's proposal for the next Multiannual Financial Framework presents encouraging steps forward while at the same time showing areas of concern for the university sector. (1) While attention to gender equality had been steadily increasing over previous iterations of the framework programme for R&I, the Commission's new proposal only briefly mentions gender and omits several important provisions related to gender included in the current regulation. The introduction of Gender Equality Plans (GEPs) in Horizon Europe has demonstrated significant improvements in the development and implementation of gender equality policies at institutional level. However, relegating gender equality considerations to the recitals of the new Horizon Europe regulation sends a worrying signal to the R&I community. Gender equality should remain a priority for the European Commission, and this should be translated by ensuring that gender equality has its rightful place in the binding provisions at the level of the programme's horizontal principles. To ensure continuity, the next MFF should maintain its commitment to gender equality with the European Commission acting as the main guarantor of this principle, therefore strengthening its contribution to the Union's objectives. In addition, the programme should explore a more holistic approach to equality, diversity, inclusion and belonging (EDIB) to ensure a richer and more inclusive contribution to R&I. (2) Regarding the application of the Do No Significant Harm principle (DNSH), EUA fully supports the environmental objectives outlined in the EU's sustainable finance taxonomy regulation. However, the broader application of the DNSH principle should be preceded by a thorough assessment of its implementation within the current Horizon Europe programme as it creates an additional administrative burden, complicating project proposals and evaluations. EUA has long advocated for the simplification of these programmes, and any broader application of the principle must not add further burdens on researchers. Furthermore, there are no clear guidelines on how the principle should be practically implemented. If the DNSH principle becomes mandatory for all framework programme projects particularly in Horizon Europe's Pillar I or for projects with lower technology readiness levels (TRLs) in Pillar II researchers may face significant challenges in undertaking certain types of (fundamental) research. (3) The proposed new provision (article 21 of the new Horizon Europe regulation) allowing the European Commission to terminate signed grants when 'the action has lost its policy relevance' is concerning. Considering the reinforced focus on EU competitiveness, this new portfolio approach risks undermining Europe's ability to support basic research by focusing on short-term economic or political priorities. Beneficiaries need legal certainty, visibility and stability for the careers of researchers engaged in such projects. In addition to this feedback, EUA's in-depth analysis of the European Commission's proposal for Horizon Europe 2028-2034 is attached.
Read full response

Meeting with Massimiliano Esposito (Head of Unit Research and Innovation) and BUSINESSEUROPE and

12 Nov 2025 · Horizon Europe 2028-2034

Meeting with Eszter Lakos (Member of the European Parliament, Rapporteur)

6 Nov 2025 · Upcoming ERA Act

Meeting with Andreas Schwarz (Cabinet of Commissioner Ekaterina Zaharieva)

21 Oct 2025 · New Framework Programme (FP10) and European universities

Response to European Research Area (ERA) Act

10 Sept 2025

EUA looks forward to the future ERA Act, which should bring the EU closer to the achievement of a fully integrated ERA and the implementation of the 5th freedom, enabling the free movement of knowledge, research, innovation and education. EUA supports its three objectives to reach the target of investing 3% of GDP in R&I, better align investments and improve researchers framework conditions. In the past, unequal levels of engagement among member states in the implementation of the ERA Policy Agenda have led to contrasted results. This type of legislation could therefore help the EU to overcome this issue and further advance the ERA. EUAs key recommendations for the design of the ERA Act are: (1) To foster the attractiveness of research careers, the Act should enable multiple and more flexible career pathways and prioritise the improvement of researchers' working conditions and the reduction of barriers to their mobility, e.g. through the harmonisation of research positions and pension schemes. (2) The 5th freedom should not be limited to mobility, but encompass the full circulation of knowledge in all its dimensions, including openness in education, research data and methodologies as a defining principle. (3) The Act should support a harmonised framework for an equitable open science ecosystem with open infrastructures, reduced barriers to open access -through a European Secondary Publishing Right, backed by rights retention policies- and reform of research assessment. (4) Including knowledge valorisation is welcome and should boost R&I impact, but the Act should provide legal clarity on how to rethink academic structures that currently favour research and teaching while giving little incentive to innovation. (5) While a common conception and approach to the protection of the freedom of scientific research shared across the EU would be helpful, any regulatory and/or legislative action to protect and support it should be mindful of existing national and other (international) frameworks, and related implementation issues. (6) The Act is a unique opportunity to foster cross-border collaboration and sustainable access to funding. To achieve this, member states must commit to reforms and make significant national investments to reach the 3% target, with close monitoring to guarantee successful implementation. While these issues are important to address, EUA calls for a proportionate approach: the Act should focus on key objectives that cannot be achieved at national level in accordance with the subsidiarity principle. Moreover, it is of utmost importance that the Act maintains a balance between reducing fragmentation and maintaining adequate levels of flexibility and autonomy for institutions. The Act should guarantee an assessment of new legislation to ensure it is 'fit for research', in line with the 'university check' advocated for by EUA. While binding measures are welcome to make headway on parts of the ERA, the Commission should reflect on the risk of unintended consequences and assess the danger of overly restrictive measures. To ensure effective implementation, proposals should not create an additional burden for institutions, such as increased compliance checks. Moreover, member states' lack of compliance with the binding principles of the ERA Act should not put R&I actors at a disadvantage. Finally, the ERA Act should complement related EU initiatives: the ERA and the Innovation Acts should reinforce one another. Closer alignment and coordination with the European Education Area and European Higher Education Area are also necessary. Following these initial considerations on the ERA Act, EUA will continue to monitor the proposed legislation's progress and provide further input in the coming months as part of the upcoming consultations. EUA looks forward to further dialogue with the Commission to contribute to making the ERA Act a successful initiative that strengthens Europe's R&I ecosystem.
Read full response

Meeting with Lucilla Sioli (Director Communications Networks, Content and Technology) and

9 Jul 2025 · Exchange between AI Office and representatives from the Guild, CESAER, EUA, Coimbra Group and YERUN

Meeting with Idoia Mendia (Member of the European Parliament)

4 Jun 2025 · Meeting with European University Association

European University Association urges academic-led, publicly funded AI research

2 Jun 2025
Topic — The initiative develops a policy framework for adopting artificial intelligence across European science.
Message — The association calls for a distributed infrastructure system that ensures researchers have fair, excellence-based access. They argue that the academic community must lead the governance of AI factories through a scientific council. Furthermore, the strategy should rely on additional public funding to protect non-commercial research interests.123
Why — Universities would secure guaranteed access to high-end computing resources and dedicated public funding.4
Impact — Commercial publishers and private vendors would face limits on data and infrastructure control.5
Read full response

Meeting with Andrea Wechsler (Member of the European Parliament)

15 May 2025 · EU Research Policy

Meeting with Ekaterina Zaharieva (Commissioner) and

13 May 2025 · Next Framework Programme for Research and Innovation, European Research Area Act, European Innovation Act, Choose Europe

Response to Interim evaluation of the Strategic Technologies for Europe Platform (2024-2025)

9 Apr 2025

STEP plays a crucial role in bolstering Europes industrial competitiveness, and the European University Association (EUA)* recognises the European Commissions ambition in taking bold steps to ensure the European economy thrives. However, the Commission's declarations that STEP may serve as a model for the future European Competitiveness Fund, potentially absorbing some of the existing programmes, such as the EU Research and Innovation Framework Programme, is concerning. While strengthening Europes competitiveness is a vital objective, applying this model to Horizon Europes successor programme (FP10) entails significant risks. A defining strength of the R&I Framework Programme has been its ability to support both strategic priorities and open scientific inquiry. FP10 must uphold this balance by maintaining a strong bottom-up funding approach, ensuring that researchers can pursue curiosity-driven investigations that contribute to long-term competitiveness. If FP10 is integrated into a Competitiveness Fund built on the experience of STEP, research areas without direct impact on economic growth could be deprioritised. Such a shift would weaken Europes capacity for breakthrough innovation and resilience in addressing future global challenges. A competitiveness-driven model risks diminishing the impact of key programme initiatives such as the European Research Council, Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions, and the EIC Pathfinder Open, which underpin bottom-up research and sustain Europes research excellence, as well as collaborative research opportunities currently housed in Pillar 2. Likewise, it could undermine the strengthening of the European Research Area by pushing horizontal priorities such as Open Science, FAIR data principles, and gender equality to the periphery. It may also lead to restrictions on international collaboration, a long-standing pillar of Europes leadership in research and innovation. Similarly, Social Sciences, Humanities, and the Arts could be marginalised, despite their crucial role in addressing societal transformations and informing policy. The future model, informed by STEPs experience, may seek to streamline funding rules. However, it risks instead increasing bureaucracy and administrative burden. The Commission should therefore conduct a thorough evaluation of the current STEP model before attempting to harmonise rules across different funds in the next MFF. Additionally, any restructuring of programme structures should prioritise efficiency improvements rather than introducing additional administrative hurdles. To mitigate these risks, FP10 must remain independent, ensuring that Europe remains a global leader in scientific excellence while also contributing to competitiveness. The European Commission should design the Competitiveness Fund to complement rather than absorb the Framework Programme, safeguarding funding for open research and ensuring long-term stability for researchers and innovators. While STEP has demonstrated the benefits of streamlining funding for strategic technologies, it should not establish a precedent for subordinating Horizon Europes successor to a politically driven funding model. FP10 must continue to support both strategic and open research to sustain Europes leadership in global innovation. * With more than 900 members and affiliates, the European University Association (EUA) is the largest representative organisation of universities and national rectors conferences in 49 European countries. EUA is a recognised stakeholder in the development of EU programmes for research, education and innovation. The Association actively contributes to all major European-level dialogues as the next MFF begins to take shape. By engaging with policy makers and stakeholders, EUA seeks to place research, education and innovation at the forefront of Europes competitiveness and prosperity.
Read full response

Meeting with Filip Van Depoele (Head of Unit Education, Youth, Sport and Culture) and The Guild of European Research-Intensive Universities and

4 Apr 2025 · Exchange of views on the future of the international dimension of the Erasmus+ Programme

Meeting with Marcos Ros Sempere (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur)

6 Mar 2025 · Meeting with European University Association

Meeting with Laurence Farreng (Member of the European Parliament, Rapporteur) and Una Europa vzw

18 Feb 2025 · Futur des Alliances d'Universités européennes

Meeting with Pauline Rouch (Director Research and Innovation)

29 Jan 2025 · Exchange of views on R&I policy and EUA’s priorities for Horizon Europe and FP10

Meeting with Christian Ehler (Member of the European Parliament, Rapporteur)

28 Jan 2025 · FP10

Meeting with Christian Ehler (Member of the European Parliament, Rapporteur) and The Guild of European Research-Intensive Universities and

27 Jan 2025 · FP10

Meeting with Christophe Galand (Head of Unit Budget) and The Guild of European Research-Intensive Universities and

23 Jan 2025 · Discussion on research place in the the future Multiannual Financial Framework

Meeting with Andrea Wechsler (Member of the European Parliament) and Eurochild AISBL and Haus & Grund Deutschland, e.V.

15 Jan 2025 · EU Policy

Meeting with Sabrina Repp (Member of the European Parliament)

5 Nov 2024 · EU education policy

Meeting with Sunčana Glavak (Member of the European Parliament)

16 Oct 2024 · views of Europe’s universities on higher education cooperation, student mobility as well as the Erasmus+ programme and flagships like the European Universities Initiative

Response to Communication on the European Research Area Implementation

27 Sept 2024

The European University Association (EUA) welcomes this call for evidence, which concludes 4 successful years of the renewed ERA. The co-creation process with stakeholders has been particularly valuable to ERAs numerous achievements and the fulfilment of commitments from the Pact for R&I. However, various factors are hampering progress in many areas of the Pact and Policy Agenda, first and foremost the divergent interests and levels of engagement among the European Commission, member states, associated countries and stakeholders. While some actions are very successful, others have barely commenced, and the minimum commitment threshold of 50% of member states is insufficient. Actions and structural policies need to be co-led by at least 1 state and 1 stakeholder with the Commission, and having fewer focal points may draw broader commitments in the future. Also, without significant investments and legal reforms spurred by ERA, the Letta reports call for a 5th freedom is unlikely to be fulfilled. The ERA Forum has progressed well and improved its functioning over time. Yet, there is still limited strategic/political support and direction within ERAC and beyond. This renders little value in discussing certain actions, especially as there are too many for states and stakeholders to follow and contribute to. There was also excessive focus on the next ERA Policy Agenda in the second half of the Forums work, losing sight of the ongoing agenda and actions. Overall, ERA actions should have clear objectives guiding the definition of activities, outputs and milestones. Stakeholders can then better understand the expected outcomes, which facilitates a more proportionate and fit for purpose implementation. ERA Actions 2, 3, 5 and 17 are good examples of how concrete goals and activities ensure success and alignment with broad policy priorities. Conversely, the scope of some other actions does not necessarily align with their intended focus: the work in ERA Action 16 on access to excellence is limited to a single aspect (synergies), leaving out the broader range of ways to improve access to excellence. Therefore, there is potential to deepen various actions. Contributing to long-term strategic goals, rather than being project-based and limited in scope, is crucial. Long-running processes such as the green and digital transitions may be enabled by more time-limited objectives and KPIs, but care must be taken to maintain the ambition of achieving societal change. This should translate into an adequate operationalisation of structural policies, which can prevent losing track of larger objectives and which EUA strongly supports. For instance, the SET Plan has effectively mobilised R&I activities for sustainability before the renewal of ERA, and the proposed integration of these two frameworks must build upon and broaden existing achievements with the added impetus of the Green Deal. Finally, stakeholders should enjoy the status of regular contributors rather than being confined to the one of observers (as in Action 16). They have demonstrated their strong commitment and engagement in subgroup discussions, and the subgroups where they are actively involved have been particularly successful. Moreover, ERA actions should ensure good communication with stakeholders who are key in disseminating the actions progress and results across different target communities. Not all actions have achieved this, and in some cases (e.g. Action 14), results were not properly communicated to stakeholders who committed to the actions, thus limiting engagement, outreach and ultimate impact. EUA looks forward to fostering an enhanced ERA through continued co-creation, and remains committed to mobilising the university sector in support of ambitious goals for European R&I. As stakeholders, universities have a major stake in the new ERA as providers of evidence who identify key challenges and define their solutions.
Read full response

Meeting with Christian Ehler (Member of the European Parliament)

15 May 2024 · Proposal for a Directive on Transparency of Interest Representation on behalf of Third Countries

Meeting with Christian Ehler (Member of the European Parliament) and Netherlands House for Education and Research (Neth-ER) and

25 Mar 2024 · Science and research policy

Response to Enhancing research security in Europe

19 Dec 2023

The European University Association (EUA) welcomes the initiative. The main elements of the initiative are sound and conducive to responsible internationalisation. Open cooperation must be the default option as already defined in the European Commissions Global Approach. Openness should be responsible, with proportional measures to counter risks, in the relatively small number of cases where these are present. Moreover, the risk of non-cooperation should be taken into account. Identifying risks in the areas of security, ethics and integrity can only be done in close dialogue between authorities, universities and the academic community that is developing collaborations in practice. EUA also welcomes the emphasis on support for developing and strengthening risk management within universities and other higher education and research-performing institutions. Regarding policies at the European level, the aim of consistency should also apply to the place of the research security initiative in the larger picture of the economic security strategy and the aim of open strategic autonomy. See details about the EUA in the attached document.
Read full response

Meeting with Marc Lemaitre (Director-General Research and Innovation)

6 Jun 2023 · ERA European strategy for Universities FP10

Response to Virtual worlds, such as metaverse

2 May 2023

THE EUROPEAN UNIVERSITY ASSOCIATIONS INPUT TO THE EUROPEAN COMMISSIONS VIRTUAL WORLDS INITIATIVE The European University Association (EUA) welcomes the initiative of the European Commission to develop comprehensive and inclusive policies for the development of virtual and augmented reality. EUA also applauds the aim to further innovation and avoid dominance of a few large companies. Education and research institutions, including universities and their communities, are important users, as well as creators, of these technologies. Universities are also greenhouses for digital innovation, key players in innovation ecosystems and providers of the skills required to develop and use innovative virtual learning and research spaces. Virtual and augmented reality are increasingly used in research, education, innovation and culture. This is the case in fields such as engineering, architecture or medicine, where these technologies are used for simulation and modelling. Generally, they are also used for virtual mobility and collaboration. Such practices became more widespread during the Covid-19 pandemic, allowing for a more inclusive approach to education. This could well be scaled up in the coming years. It is vital that these activities are underpinned by physical and digital infrastructure that enables innovation and safeguards academic values, as well as open standards that facilitate sharing, cooperation and inclusion. To create such an open and interoperable environment, public investment will be important. Universities must have the capacity to develop and maintain infrastructure and to access publicly funded infrastructure, as well as the financial means to access commercial solutions. Investments must also be made in the capacity of universities to create technologies within their innovation ecosystems. In their various roles, universities will adopt technologies across many domains, which will add to the amount of investment needed. It is therefore welcome that the European Commission aims to further private investment. However, ambitious public investment will remain a necessity if universities are to contribute to the development and use of these technologies. It is unlikely that the existing European programmes will be sufficient for the necessary investment, beyond the financing of pilot projects or similar. For that reason, it is very welcome that the initiative includes the coordination of national funding. Such coordination highlights the need for a European governance model that includes a wide range of stakeholders. Regarding the role of governance, the Commission roadmap mentions a multitude of issues. These are all important, but the development of standards that allow access, interoperability and privacy in an open ecosystem remains key. Ambition in these central areas would be preferable to having too wide a remit. In order to achieve this, the proposed governance structure must include a diverse set of stakeholders that represent the whole higher education and research ecosystem. In addition, the governance structure would benefit from common foresight including all relevant Commission services and member states to monitor the development of virtual worlds and identify trends, needs and opportunities. In conclusion, ambitious investments and inclusive governance aimed at open virtual worlds will be essential elements of seizing the opportunities and managing the risks associated with virtual and augmented reality, both in the near and far future.
Read full response

Response to Recommendation on covert interference from third countries

12 Apr 2023

The European University Association supports the package, but urges that it should empower civil society and not limit societal and global dialogue under the guise of protection against for example foreign interference. Particularly for universities, it is important that they can fulfil their function within society by providing evidence and scientific literacy for a democratic debate. This means protecting academic freedom and institutional autonomy. Universities must also continue to be gateways of global dialogue and people-to-people contacts, also beyond like-minded countries.
Read full response

Meeting with Laurence Farreng (Member of the European Parliament, Rapporteur for opinion) and European Youth Forum and British Council

9 Mar 2023 · Shadows’ meeting with stakeholders "Implementation of the EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement: Implications for the education and youth sectors"

Meeting with Mariya Gabriel (Commissioner)

7 Mar 2023 · Universities alliances

Meeting with Christian Ehler (Member of the European Parliament) and League of European Research Universities

31 Jan 2023 · Academic Freedom

Response to Improving the provision of digital skills in education and training

16 Sept 2022

Key messages from the European University Association 1. To better integrate digital skills into institutional and academic cultures, there needs to be more recognition of learning and teaching engagement in academic career development. 2. We must not reduce digital skills to technical skills; they require social, communicative skills and awareness of values such as inclusion, solidarity, freedom of expression and academic freedom. 3. A solid knowledge base and evidence are required to address and resolve issues around digital skills and the digital transformation in European higher education. 4. Better recognition is needed of the role of higher education institutions in the digital transformation, including for skills development. 5. Skills for the digital transformation are part and parcel of higher education institutions’ research and education mission, and are of crucial importance to students, staff and lifelong learners. Complete feedback is contained within the attached policy input
Read full response

Response to Enabling factors for digital education

16 Sept 2022

Key messages from the European University Association: 1. Europe needs a broad, political debate about the digital transformation of universities and their place within this transformation 2. The digital transformation of universities must be led by university values, enabling sharing and participation 3. For universities, the digital transformation is about using data and technologies to add value in and for the institution and as a means to implement change 4. EU plans for investments in digital infrastructure must include universities’ needs for education, research, innovation and culture 5. Regulatory obstacles are still hindering implementation of digital tools in European higher education Complete feedback is contained within the attached policy input.
Read full response

Response to Erasmus+ 2021-2027 interim evaluation and Erasmus+ 2014-2020 final evaluation

12 Sept 2022

The European University Association (EUA) and its members welcomed the Erasmus+ programme 2021-2027, notably for its increased budget and new actions. However, Erasmus+ 2021-2027 started with some delay. A majority of action lines are now about a year into implementation. Some, including the third country programmes, have yet to commence. Hence, the attached contribution to the call for evidence summarises initial observations and evidence gathered from EUA’s member institutions. It also outlines certain key issues, some of which have already been addressed in EUA’s report for the 2016 Erasmus+ midterm review. These issues will be further explored in a membership consultation survey in autumn/winter 2022 that will inform EUA’s contribution to the EU’s public consultation in spring 2023.
Read full response

Response to Ex-post evaluation of Horizon 2020

26 Jul 2022

Feedback by the European University Association (EUA) on Horizon 2020 rules for participation and simplification Throughout the preparation phase of Horizon 2020, its implementation and mid-term review and the preparation phase of Horizon Europe the European University Association (EUA) has consistently called for, and made proposals towards, impactful, beneficiary-focused simplification of the programme. EUA has extensively analysed the matter over the long-term (including FP7), allowing to shape important principles for the development of Horizon Europe. These elements are relevant to assess the successes and pitfalls of Horizon 2020 but should also be considered in the context of the mid-term review of Horizon Europe and the development of the post-2028 funding programme generation. EUA has long addressed the issue of low success rates in the Framework programmes (FP) as a problem to be tackled from different angles, notably by increasing synergies among EU-funded programmes to finance excellent but unsuccessful FP proposals. Simplification of the project application, implementation and auditing phases also play an important role in increasing success rates and participation in the programme. Therefore, on behalf of universities, EUA has called for accepting beneficiaries’ accounting practices under Horizon Europe (publication see list of research and findings) to make a more efficient use of project resources, reduce error rates and improve cross-reliance between national and EU audits. EUA conducted two broad consultations with its members on this topic on the occasion of the Horizon 2020 mid-term review and to investigate the effects of specific simplification measures introduced in 2017 (publication see list of research and findings). The information gathered was enriched by the work of an expert group of university practitioners who shared practical information on accounting practices applied to the management of nationally funded research projects. The practices are collected in a compendium (publication see list of research and findings), where they are also compared to Horizon 2020 rules in an exploration of new possibilities for a better alignment of rules between the EU and the national level in Horizon Europe. EUA is convinced that one of the keys to simplification of EU funding programmes is to improve the EU control environment based on the principles of efficiency, effectiveness and value for money. This means EU control must yield greater assurance for EU funders about beneficiaries’ compliance with EU funding rules, while costing less money and effort to all parties. While acknowledging the challenges connected to achieving greater alignment of funding practices among European and national funding bodies, EUA’s proposals for achieving high-quality audit in European research (publication see list of research and findings) aimed to generate management efficiencies for both funders and beneficiaries, build trust, reduce errors and thus release resources for research and innovation. The list of publications referred to in this feedback can be found in the attached document as well as on the EUA website https://eua.eu/
Read full response

Response to Interim evaluation of Horizon Europe

26 Jul 2022

Feedback by the European University Association (EUA) on Horizon Europe rules for participation and simplification Throughout the preparation phase of Horizon 2020, its implementation and mid-term review and the preparation phase of Horizon Europe the European University Association (EUA) has consistently called for, and made proposals towards, impactful, beneficiary-focused simplification of the programme. EUA has extensively analysed the matter over the long-term (including FP7), allowing to shape important principles for the development of Horizon Europe. These elements are relevant to assess the successes and pitfalls of Horizon 2020 but should also be considered in the context of the mid-term review of Horizon Europe and the development of the post-2028 funding programme generation. EUA has long addressed the issue of low success rates in the Framework programmes (FP) as a problem to be tackled from different angles, notably by increasing synergies among EU-funded programmes to finance excellent but unsuccessful FP proposals. Simplification of the project application, implementation and auditing phases also play an important role in increasing success rates and participation in the programme. Therefore, on behalf of universities, EUA has called for accepting beneficiaries’ accounting practices under Horizon Europe (publication see list of research and findings) to make a more efficient use of project resources, reduce error rates and improve cross-reliance between national and EU audits. EUA conducted two broad consultations with its members on this topic on the occasion of the Horizon 2020 mid-term review and to investigate the effects of specific simplification measures introduced in 2017 (publication see list of research and findings). The information gathered was enriched by the work of an expert group of university practitioners who shared practical information on accounting practices applied to the management of nationally funded research projects. The practices are collected in a compendium (publication see list of research and findings), where they are also compared to Horizon 2020 rules in an exploration of new possibilities for a better alignment of rules between the EU and the national level in Horizon Europe. EUA is convinced that one of the keys to simplification of EU funding programmes is to improve the EU control environment based on the principles of efficiency, effectiveness and value for money. This means EU control must yield greater assurance for EU funders about beneficiaries’ compliance with EU funding rules, while costing less money and effort to all parties. While acknowledging the challenges connected to achieving greater alignment of funding practices among European and national funding bodies, EUA’s proposals for achieving high-quality audit in European research (publication see list of research and findings) aimed to generate management efficiencies for both funders and beneficiaries, build trust, reduce errors and thus release resources for research and innovation. The list of publications referred to in this feedback can be found in the attached document as well as on the EUA website https://eua.eu/
Read full response

Meeting with Karen Melchior (Member of the European Parliament) and Danish Institute for Human Rights

25 Jun 2021 · Exchange of Views

Meeting with Mariya Gabriel (Commissioner)

16 Apr 2021 · “Universities without Walls - A vision for 2030”

Meeting with Jean-Eric Paquet (Director-General Research and Innovation)

29 Jan 2021 · ERA

Meeting with Jean-Eric Paquet (Director-General Research and Innovation)

21 Jan 2021 · Webinar for the Finnish Higher Education Institutions’ vice-rectors and directors in charge of RDI

Meeting with Sabine Verheyen (Member of the European Parliament, Committee chair)

2 Sept 2020 · Brexit and European Education Area

Response to Achieving the European Education Area

26 Aug 2020

Education, including higher education, plays a key role in knowledge-based societies. It supports social cohesion and inclusion and contributes to economic competitiveness and individual fulfillment. The European University Association (EUA) representing 800+ universities in 48 countries and 33 national university associations welcomes the European Commission’s renewed focus on education since the “Gothenburg Social Summit for Fair Jobs and Growth” in 2017 and strongly believes that European collaboration is needed to ensure that the education systems remain fit-for-purpose. Since the EU’s competence in education is limited to supporting member states actions, developing a European dimension and foster educational quality, members states’ ability to agree on common policy priorities and willingness to implement concrete changes will be crucial for realising the vision of a European Education Area (later the Area). EUA makes the following six comments on plans for the Area at this stage: 1) Taking a holistic view on education It is important that policies under the umbrella of the Area take a holistic view on education, including the transitions between different educational levels and sectors. Education should enable the development of learners as active and responsible citizens, critical thinkers, problem solvers, and equipped for life-long learning. This holistic approach should acknowledge the need for re-skilling and up-skilling in view of the digital and green transitions and the role that higher education plays in this regard. 2) Ensuring coherence with existing frameworks In higher education, the Bologna Process and the European Higher Education Area are a well-established and already working framework for co-operation and this intergovernmental cooperation encompasses 48 European countries going beyond the EU. Synergies between these two frameworks and policy coherence insofar higher education is concerned are of crucial importance for universities and for the success of the Area. 3) Promoting policy coordination and synergies An effective Area requires education policies to be intrinsically linked to other EU policies, such as research and innovation, digitalisation, social affairs, and employment. In particular, EUA finds it important to ensure synergies with the European Research Area, the European Commission’s Industrial Strategy for Europe, the European Digital Strategy, and the forthcoming Digital Education Action Plan. 4) Embracing diversity and fostering inclusive education systems Making education systems more inclusive and promote diversity are key challenges for Europe at all levels of education, including higher education, but a lot remains to be done to achieve this. European collaboration can support this by fostering mutual learning and exchange both at policy level and between educational institutions and actors through collaboration projects in the framework of EU funding programmes such as Erasmus+. 5) Recognising the international dimension of higher education International collaboration with partners across the world is a key feature of the European Higher Education Area. Any EU policies need to ensure that higher education collaboration at the global level. The experience shows that European policies and funding can provide added value to institutional and national approaches and contribute to the global visibility and recognition of Europe and its higher education. 6) Establishing a transparent process with systematic involvement of key stakeholders Further to the buy-in needed from member states to realise the full potential of the Area, it is vital that representatives of key stakeholders, such as universities, are systematically involved in the development. This is of importance in higher education, where institutional autonomy is a core value. EUA looks forward to continuing to work with the EC in further developing European higher education.
Read full response

Meeting with Ivo Belet (Cabinet of Vice-President Dubravka Šuica), Mattia De' Grassi (Cabinet of Vice-President Dubravka Šuica)

16 Jul 2020 · Discussion on the Conference on the Future of Europe and their project of launching a new academic journal on Democracy

Meeting with Mariya Gabriel (Commissioner)

4 Jun 2020 · the next steps in the European Universities initiative, the road towards the Universities of the future, the role of universities in responding to COVID-19

Meeting with Jean-Eric Paquet (Director-General Research and Innovation)

6 Dec 2019 · MFF/European Research Area

Meeting with Themis Christophidou (Director-General Education, Youth, Sport and Culture)

15 Oct 2019 · Meeting with the new President of EUA, Professor Michael Murphy

Meeting with Mariya Gabriel (Commissioner)

15 Oct 2019 · European research, education and innovation policy

Meeting with Jean-Eric Paquet (Director-General Research and Innovation)

11 Apr 2019 · Annual Conference- Innovation in Europe's Universities

Meeting with Daniel Calleja Crespo (Director-General Environment)

7 Jan 2019 · Environmental research

Meeting with Jean-Eric Paquet (Director-General Research and Innovation)

13 Jun 2018 · Discussions on the new EU research programme on R&I and MFF

Meeting with Themis Christophidou (Director-General Education, Youth, Sport and Culture)

3 May 2018 · Discussion about European Education Area, Bologna Process and network of European universities

Response to Joint Communication: "The European Union and Latin America and the Caribbean: A renewed partnership"

23 Mar 2018

The European University Association believe that supporting stronger higher education institutions and systems in the region will help support 1) the contribution of higher education to foreign policy goals by contributing to the resilience of societies in the region; 2) furthering sustainable development, particularly through better connections between research and education; 3) systemic impact and European added value of policies and instruments by enabling regional integration through awareness of the experience done in the European Higher Education Area and the European Research Area Europe should support a centralised platform and mechanism to ensure synergies and impact of different projects while reinforcing representative bodies at regional level
Read full response

Meeting with Giulia Del Brenna (Cabinet of Commissioner Carlos Moedas)

12 Jan 2017 · Science Diplomacy

Meeting with Aura Salla (Cabinet of Vice-President Jyrki Katainen)

13 Jun 2016 · research, innovation and education

Meeting with Tibor Navracsics (Commissioner)

18 Feb 2016 · European Higher Education Policy

Meeting with Tibor Navracsics (Commissioner)

29 Jan 2015 · European higher education policy and Bologna process

Meeting with Xavier Prats Monné (Director-General Education, Youth, Sport and Culture)

1 Dec 2014 · Higher Education

Meeting with Xavier Prats Monné (Director-General Education, Youth, Sport and Culture)

1 Dec 2014 · Cooperation in the comming years on Higher Education with EUA

Meeting with Patricia Reilly (Cabinet of Commissioner Tibor Navracsics)

24 Nov 2014 · Higher Education Policy