OpenLobby.EU
Explore

Institut français de recherche pour l’exploitation de la mer

IFREMER

L’Ifremer, institut de recherche intégré en sciences marines, mène des recherches, produit des expertises et crée des innovations pour protéger et restaurer l’océan, exploiter ses ressources de manière responsable, partager les données marines et proposer de nouveaux services à toutes les parties prenantes.

Lobbying Activity

Meeting with Costas Kadis (Commissioner) and

4 Nov 2025 · Exchange on the ICES scientific process and future challenges

Response to European strategy on research and technology infrastructures

21 May 2025

Research and technological infrastructures are essential tools for meeting Europe's ambitions in terms of research at the service of citizens, whether to acquire data on the state of socio-ecosystems or to act as a lever for socio-economic innovation. These infrastructures need public investment. Research infrastructures require sustainable resources to operate and be upgraded. The mosaic of funding instruments makes it harder for RIs to find funding and increases the administrative burden on the teams that operate and develop them. The effects of current US policy are worrying for the relevance of networks for observing the earth and its ecosystems. Money must be injected into the corresponding environmental RIs if Europe is to assert its world leadership in environmental data and the resulting digital twins. This investment is necessary if we are to avoid very lasting damage to our capacity to make data available to inform public policy in a context of climate instability. In many cases, there is a need for concentration to avoid dispersion. ERICs sometimes offer services that could be factorised. The idea is to avoid multiplying RIs, each with its own objectives and sources of funding, and then trying to get them to work together with limited resources. Europe could make aid conditional on this rationalisation. In terms of rationalisation, there is still work to be done to improve the coordination of the oceanographic research fleets. Going beyond OFEG must be an objective to optimise OPEX and the environmental footprint of these major infrastructures. Europe must be a driving force in this. On the contrary, in the field of marine science and technology, there is no recognised infrastructure to support companies working on marine and underwater robotics. This is a shortcoming in a field that is prone to innovation. Research infrastructures need to be more open to private sector. TNAs are a good way of initiating public/private links for young infrastructures. When they become more mature, we could imagine, as in the French Carnot mechanism, paying them a bonus based on the volume of their contractual relations with companies. The proposed actions respond in part to the needs identified, but there are several limitations. As we have said, the tendency to create new infrastructures without a clear coordination mechanism risks increasing the complexity of the European landscape, with a duplication of resources, governance tasks and visibility efforts. This increases the need for steering bodies and a specific budget to encourage exchanges, standardisation and cross-functionality between infrastructures. This is neither financially nor humanly efficient. We need to look for different ways of managing the whole, perhaps by devising incentives for a few key objectives: contact with the business world, eliminating duplication. At the same time, to imagine the future, it would be interesting to develop programmes to fund highly innovative developments in terms of infrastructure. Based on the ERC and the EIT, these programmes could be inspired by initiatives such as the ERC Proof of Concept calls to facilitate access to financial support for beneficiaries of various sizes and origins, and encourage interaction with businesses, particularly SMEs and start-ups.
Read full response

Meeting with Christophe Clergeau (Member of the European Parliament)

20 Mar 2025 · SEARICA

Meeting with Christophe Clergeau (Member of the European Parliament) and Conférence des Régions Périphériques Maritimes d'Europe (CRPM) and

15 Jan 2025 · SEARICA

Meeting with Christophe Clergeau (Member of the European Parliament)

28 Nov 2023 · Recherche sur les espaces maritimes

Response to A New European Innovation Agenda

9 May 2022

Annex in english L’IFREMER innove dans le cadre de l’ambition politique verte et digitale de l’UE. Nous concentrons nos efforts sur la Blue Economy et le soutien au développement de projets deep tech. L’IFREMER souhaite se positionner sur quatre dimensions de l’agenda. Une annexe d’une page permet d’aller plus loin. Tout d’abord, en ce qui concerne l’accès au financement, l’IFREMER se sent concerné car l’Institut accompagne des start-ups deep tech dans le cadre du concours Octo’Pousse (1), met en œuvre des partenariats avec les acteurs du secteur privé (2, 3), et est partenaire d’un fonds d’investissement (4). • (1) Les start-ups et projets de start-ups accompagnés par les centres de recherches doivent être soutenus sans réserve par les acteurs de l’écosystème. En effet, les entreprises ou projets accompagnés par ces centres sont déjà passés un lourd processus de sélection en amont, y compris en ce qui concerne le business model, les perspectives de retombées économiques, et l’impact pour la société et l’environnement. • (2) Il y a aujourd’hui une grande disparité dans la couverture des coûts d’un projet collaboratif (public/privé) entre les programmes de financement français (souvent 50% des coûts complets au maximum) et européens (100% des coûts dans les RIA et IA européennes pour les centres de recherche / EIC Pathfinder). En outre, la question de l’investissement privé sur ces projets, en lien avec des fonds publics, se pose aussi. On pourrait ainsi imaginer, dans le cadre d’un projet collaboratif pas entièrement financé par des fonds publics, un mécanisme dans lequel le partenaire privé a obligation de couvrir tout ou partie (en fonction du type et de la taille de l’acteur privé) des coûts restants d’un centre de recherche ou d’une université. • (3) L’exemple français des instituts Carnot pourrait en outre être pris comme exemple dans l’UE pour booster la recherche contractuelle, en faisant attention aux liens avec l’EIT et les KIC. • (4) Enfin, il serait bénéfique que le marché du capital-risque s’élargisse en Europe (l’IFREMER travaille à cela pour la Blue Economy, en lien avec le Blue Ocean Fund de SWEN Partners), notamment pour des TRL basses Pour ce qui concernent les conditions-cadres, l’IFREMER est favorable aux sas règlementaires qui permettraient de tester et faire émerger des produits venant d’entreprises deep tech, et/ou de réduire le fossé existant entre vitesse des développements technologiques et mise en place des normes. En outre, faire participer, de manière sectorielle, les acteurs de la recherche et de l’innovation aux processus législatifs est intéressant pour mettre en œuvre les conditions-cadres les plus adaptées. A propos des écosystèmes d’innovation, l’IFREMER ressent la fragmentation qu’évoque le document de consultation. Il ne s’agit pas d’uniformiser les écosystèmes mais de faire en sorte qu’ils soient mieux interconnectés pour booster leur efficacité. De plus, les fonds des Etats-Membres, des régions, et de l’UE mériteraient d’être plus souvent liés afin de rendre plus clair le panorama des acteurs du soutien à la deep tech et à l’innovation venant de la recherche, et d’augmenter les financements totaux disponibles. L’IFREMER travaille en outre à créer un environnement propice à l’innovation bleue en coordonnant la CSA Prep4Blue de la Mission Restore Our Ocean and Water, et en étant très actif dans la mise en œuvre générale de cette Mission. A propos de la fracture de l’innovation, l’IFREMER souhaite témoigner d’un blocage réglementaire européen qui nous empêche d’être aussi actif que nous le souhaiterions dans les RUPs françaises. En effet, le siège de l’IFREMER se situe à Brest et les règlements européens nous interdisent de participer comme coordinateur aux projets COST ou Widening car nos entités dans les RUPs sont considérées comme des branches. C’est très dommage car ces centres RUP pourraient être des leaders afin de tirer vers le haut les écosystèmes de recherche et innovation locaux.
Read full response

Response to Offshore renewable energy strategy

31 Jul 2020

Marine research community is at the forefront to provide solid knowledge base for the offshore energy sector and plays a key role in contributing to a successful implementation of the coming EU offshore renewable energy strategy. It is therefore primordial that the Strategy takes into account all R&I aspects in the development of offshore renewable energy (ORE) and in full compliance with the “do no harm” principle, as well as synergising relevant funding & collaborating instruments. We would like to stress the importance on issues such as maintaining the support for the testing facilities, generating metocean knowledge (e.g. current, wave & wind) for resource assessment & environmental loading on the structures, research on material properties and behaviours (e.g. composite and synthetic fibres, dynamic cables, biofouling and non-toxic antifouling methods, remote sensing), geophysical/geotechnical studies, innovations on energy storage, while continuing exploring other offshore renewable energy potentials with low TRL. For the ORE deployment in an already highly occupied seascape, the Strategy should take into account relevant research & observations on environmental monitoring technologies, cumulative impacts assessment methods that will encompass marine spatial planning and integrate the socio-economic aspects for coastal communities. Research on the impacts on marine ecosystems and populations include developing new tools and indicators (e.g. GIS, risk assessment, ecosystem modelling) which would require accurate and high frequency data on the state of the oceans and biological populations. The Strategy has an opportunity to present the OREs infrastructures as at-sea observatories, allowing extensive data collection and the development of in-situ experiment sites. Only through a comprehensive knowledge base can the Strategy deliver de-risking projects, assure a reliable grid & energy system, and strive towards the Green Deal goals. To be able to power the European Green Deal, the offshore renewable energy strategy should fully synergise relevant policies, initiatives and EU funding instruments. As already mentioned in the roadmap for the Biodiversity & Hydrogen Strategies, the offshore renewable energy strategy should also bring in the SET Plan and the NECPs. Most of the offshore energy testing facilities are currently supported through the Research Infrastructure initiatives, via EU funding or the national RI roadmap, as well as the ESFRI. This investment is crucial for a sustainable support in developing offshore energy. These testing facilities (from wind/wave/current-generating basins, hyperbaric tanks to material aging test) are indispensable research infrastructures not only for designing optimal offshore structures but a core element to achieving human capacity building, transnational access & collaboration and a European Research Area. The strategy should also associate with other research instruments with EU funding, for example, under the Horizon Europe, the Partnerships for Blue Oceans & Clean Energy Transition, the Mission area for healthy oceans, seas, coastal and inland waters and the destinations of relevant clusters.
Read full response