1

Joint and Open REsearch Programs

[Contract No. RTD/DirC/C3/2010/SI2.561034]

National report on joint and open programmes

POLAND

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this study are those of the authors and do not necessarily

reflect the views of the European Commission.

JOREP

2

Document Information Sheet

Deliverable Title National report on Joint and Open Programmes: Poland

Abstract The report provides an overview of the Polish research policy and its

participation to joint research funding programmes. It represents a step forward

in the analysis of joint and opened R&D programme and their economic impact

according to the tender on Investments on Joint and Opened programmes funded

by the Directorate General Research of the European Commission (JOREP

project, contract RTD/DirC/ C3/2010/SI2.561034)

Authors Julita Jablecka Warsaw University

Copyright

© 2011 The European Communities, all rights reserved.

This document may not be copied, reproduced, or modified in whole or in part for any purpose

without written permission. It may also change without prior advice.

Joint and Open Research Programme (JOREP) National Report: Poland

List of acronyms

COST Cooperation Scientifique et Technologique

CRDS Committee on Research and Development of Science

CRDE Committee on Research and Development of the Economy

CSTP Committee on Scientific and Technology Policy

ESA European Space Agency

ESF European Science Foundation

EU European Union

FP EU Framework Program

GDP Gross Domestic Product

GERD Gross Expenditures on Research and Development

HEI Higher Education Institution

MNSW Ministry of Science and Higher Education

NCBR National Research and Development Centre

NOT Polish Federation of Engineering Agencies

PAN Pilish Academy of Sciences

R&D Research and Development

SME Small and medium Enterprises

KBN State Committee for Scientific Research

4

CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................. 5

2. OVERVIEW OF PUBLIC RESEARCH FUNDING IN POLAND .. ............................................. 6

2.1. R&D funding and execution ......................................................................................................... 6 2.2. Public research funding: overview ................................................................................................ 8 2.3.Project funding overview ............................................................................................................... 9 2.4.Public research funding: some quantitative data .......................................................................... 15

3. MAPPING JOINT AND OPEN PROGRAMS .............................................................................. 15

3.1. An introductory overview ........................................................................................................... 15 3.1.1.Joint programming ............................................................................................................... 15 3.1.2. Opening of national programs ............................................................................................. 16 3.1.3.Mapping the programs .......................................................................................................... 16 3.2. Participation of Poland in European and international programs ......................................... 18

3.5. National programmes funding performers abroad....................................................................... 25 3.6. Cases of exclusion: revision of the national perimeter after the data collection ......................... 25

4. OVERALL ASSESSMENT AND DISCUSSION .......................................................................... 26

4.1. Availability of data and methodological issues ........................................................................... 27 4.2. Problems encountered with data availability and measures taken to overcome problems .......... 30

5. DISCUSSION ON NATIONAL PARTICIPATION TO JOINT AND OPEN R&D PROGRAMMES .................................................................................................................................. 30

5.1. Participation to joint initiatives (EU and national) ...................................................................... 30 5.2.Level of funding: general observations on national financial commitment on joint R&D activities ........................................................................................................................................................... 31 5.3 Relationship with other EU initiatives ......................................................................................... 32 5.4. Relationships with national R&D programmes ........................................................................... 32

6. REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................ 33

TABLES

TABLE 1. Sources of funds and their distribution among research performers in 2008 (in thous.eur) ... 6 TABLE 2. Distribution of funding coming from different sources to various performers ..................... 7 TABLE 3. Share of funding from various performers in revenues of various performers ....................... 7 TABLE 4: overview of the main funding agencies and instruments in poland 2008-2009 (does not

cover instruments of minor importance and agencies funding only one single programme .......... 14 TABLE 5. European and international programs with polish participation b.1. And b.2. ..................... 20 TABLE 6. The list of programmes excluded from the perimeter and motivations for exclusion .......... 25

5

1. Introduction

This report provides for the analysis of the Polish policy concerning participation to joint and

open research funding programs; it thus represents a first step in the tender on Investments on

joint and open R&D programs and analysis of their economic impact funded by the

Directorate General Research of the European Commission (JOREP; contract

RTD/DirC/C3/2010/SI2.561034).

The aim of the report is to provide an overveiw of joint and open programs in Poland, in

order to prepare for data collection and for the analysis of motivations and impacts of these

programs. Accordingly, it is organized in the following sections:

• first, a general overview of the national research funding system with a focus on the

organization of project funding. This information shall provide the required

background to understand the policy towards open and joint programs.

• second, an overall mapping of these programs highlighting the main patterns and

providing a first definition of the perimeter for the JOREP analysis, including of each

program by adopting the descriptors defined in the JOREP project adjusted to Polish

situation

• third, an overall assessment of the national situation and a discussion of the foreseen

availability of data, as well as of emerging methodological problems.

Finally the report introduces a discussion on national participation to joint and open

programmes, the level of funding and their connecttedness with iother EU and national

initiatives.

The report integrates information retrieved trhough the data collection exercise and some

examples are provided with citation of the joint programme according the common

numbering shared in the Jorep databases.

The report has been prepared by Warsaw University under the JOREP contract. Its contents

engage only its authors.

6

2. Overview of public research funding in Poland

This section provides a general overview of public research funding in Poland, as well as

some more specific information on project funding. This will allow to better frame the role

of open and joint programs in the overall funding landscape.

2.1. R&D funding and execution

Poland can be described as a relatively large research system (in terms of R&D employment

and number of research establishments) but with a very low R+D intensity (measured by

R&D expenditure as a percentage of GDP): while the Lisbon target is GERD as much as 3

% of GDP, in 2007 it stood at 1,85% on average in EU-27 and at 0,57% in Poland (source:

EUROSTAT 2010).

Total R+D expenditure in Poland in 2007 was 1764 million EUR (EUROSTAT 2010) and

2191,4 mln EUR in 2008 (calculation based on data from CSO 2010).

In 2007 GBAORD constituted 0,67% of GDP on average in EU-27 – and 0,32% in Poland,

which placed Poland on the 5th latest position among EU countries). (EUROSTAT 2010 a).

In 2008 GBAORD was 0, 30% of GDP (MSHE 2009).

In EU-27, R&D expenditure in 2007 by the source of funds as a percentage of total spending

accounted on average for 55% by business sector, 34% by government, 3% by other national

sources and 9% from abroad. For Poland the respective data were 34% by business, 59% by

government (no other national sources) and 7% from abroad (EUROSTAT 2010). While total

GBAORD in PPS* per inhabitant (at constant 2000 prices) in 2007 was 144 in 27—EU

countries on average , it was three times lower in Poland where reached 38 . (EUROSTAT

2010).

In 2008 R&D expenditure by sector of performance as a percentage of total spending in

Poland was as follows: 30% in business sector, 35% in government sector and 34% in

higher education sector.

TABLE 1. Sources of funds and their distribution among research performers in 2008 (in thous.EUR)

Type of Units Total Sources of Funds

budgetary scientific units of PAN and branch R&D

Enterprises From abroad own funds

Total 2191384,5 1228784,3 9995,6 125511,5 118750,8 698777,1

of which

scientific units of PAN

268022,7 226279,5 3689,0 3250,0 21983,8 10624,2

Branch R&D 594603,8 372592,8 3087,6 79146,4 36897,1 101131,1

Business enterprises

499727,1 27206,5 687,2 2707,5 12569,5 456338,7

7

Higher edu. Institutions

737246,1 572963,3 2268,1 28368,5 43678,7 84696,5

* calculation based on average exchange rate in 2008 : 1EUR=3,5166PLN

source: own calculation based on CSO data, 2010

TABLE2. Distribution of funding coming from different sources to various performers

Source: CSO 2010

TABLE 3. Share of funding from various performers in revenues of various performers.

Source: CSO 2010

Figures in table 3 show that the highest share of budgetary funds (84,4%) in total revenues of

various sector of research performance was in 2008 in PAN sector and in higher education

8

(77,7%); also the share of funding from abroad in total revenues was the highest in PAN

sector (8,2%) .

If we look how money from different sources was distributed among R&D sectors (table 2),

budgetary funding was concentrated in HE sector (46%); funding from abroad concentrated in

two sectors: the HE sector (which absorbed 36% of total funding coming from abroad) and in

branch research institutes(31,1%).

2.2. Public research funding: overview

Research funding in Poland is organized along two main funding streams: institutional

funding and project funding –they are both a part of science budget. The institutional

funding stream is totally in hands of the MNSW while project funding for the last several

years has been gradually transfered from the MNSW to the intermediary bodies- new

research councils Up to 2007 the science budget in Poland has been concentrated almost

exclusively in hands of the Minister of Science and Higher Education. But since 2007 there

are gradual chages in the organization od research funding. In 15th of June 2007 a new body

– (a type od research council) National Centre for Research and Development (NCBR) was

created and a part of funding for applied research and for development projects as well as for

several kinds of international projects has been transfered to NCBR from the MNSW. In April

30 2010 several new acts concerning research orgqanization and funding were passed by the

Parliament- a new act on research funding has clarified and changed the rules of research

evaluation and funding. A new act on NCBR gave the body more autonomy from the

Ministry and widened the scope of it activity. An act establishing a National Center of

Science (NCN) transfered all research project funding (grant system) and a part of funding

international cooperation ( including bi-lateral cooperaion) to this new body. So the period

between 2007 and 2011 was a constant and continuous flux and uclear rules of responsibility

in the period of transformation since the the changes were not a revolution completed in

several weeks but covered 4 years lasting gradual decentralization and transfer of

responsibility. Unfortunately, JOREP study covered exactly this period when officers duties

and responsibilites at these new bodies and at the MSHE were difficult to identify. Today the

responsibility of NCBR covers research and development projects in strategic programmes,

national research programs, international programs and european funds including a part of

multilateral and bilateral cooperation not covered by the NCN duties.

Institutional (called in Poland statutory)funding is distributed to both higher education and

government sector (institutes of the Polish Academy of Sciences and branch R&D units). (It

takes the majority of budgetary research funding ). (The rules of funding has hanged sinc

new regulation in 2010 but I describe below the rules in motion before 2010 since the

description concerns years 2008 and 2009) Its purpose before 2010 was to cover full or part

of operational costs or investments costs enabling research institutions to perform research

activity on continuous basis. Distribution of money was (and stil is) based on the results of

9

research evaluation (performance based funding) Under this broad category there were

several funding streams. Core (primary) funding was aimed at ensuring the continuous

performance of long-term scientific research by scientific entities. (core financing prevailed in

the structure of public expenditure on R&D). Core funding was/is allocated directly from the

MSHE: to government R+D branch units subordinated to various ministries, to Polish

Academy of Science Institutes, to higher education institutions. Within HE sector institutional

funding receive directly basic units -which are usually faculties- who individually compete

for such funding. Additionally HEIs as a whole received also funds for so called “own” (in

house) research –which they distribute internally.

The other streams of institutional financing are devoted to maintenance of expensive unique

facilities and funding investments (devoted for new and continuous investments, buildings,

equipment and information technology facilities). The final stream of institutional funding

covers various programs and undertakings specified by the MNSW (scholarships for

young investigators, support for mobility, money for restructuring of scientific entities and so

on)

Both public and private HEIs have been eligible to apply for core funding, in-house research

and research projects if they fulfill similar requirements (a.e.must teach at least at graduate

level- leading to master degrees) . But private HEIs cannot receive investment funding or

money for maintenance of unique facilities.

From the point of view of JOREP project it is important that STATUTORY PRIMARY

(institutional) funding might cover some costs of international cooperation – projects

resulting from international agreements if such costs are not covered separately by

programs for international cooperation. It has some impliction on the total structure of

spending- the actual spending for international cooperation might be higher than

separate data on international cooperation show.

2.3.Project funding overview

Project funding has been a general name for several separate funding channels of different

kind of projects.

Investigator-driven projects –(grant system) embraces projects where the research topics are

defined by the applicant (bottom up), proposals submitted from researcher’s initiative and

reviewed by mail reviewers and peer review panels. A specific kind of investigator-driven

projects are promotor’s (supervised) projects, aimed at preparing a doctoral dissertation and

habilitation research projects. This kind of projects dominate in the project system and covers

both basic and applied research and up to 2010 have been funded by the Ministry of Science

and Higher Education.

10

In case of so called ordered (solicited, thematic projects) the research topics are defined in so

called National Framework Program with priority areas of R&D. Ordered projects hav been

currently the main instruments of the government S&T policy but their significance has not

been reflected in financial terms. Since the establishment of the National R&D Centre in

2007 they have been administered and funded by this agency a part of strategic or national

framework programmes. Also development projects introduced in 2006 have been

administered by NCBR: they are designed to provide a basis for practical applications, with

the view to enhancing the greater potential and better quality of applied research and

development works performed by the R&D sector aimed at practical economy applications.

Finally, goal oriented projects have been co-funded by the user of prospective results and by

science budget (budgetary funds may make up to 70% of total research expenditures of the

project).They serve mostly cooperation between research institutions (HEIs or branch

government establishments) and business sector . Some of these projects are co-funded from

business money and budgetary or/ and structural funds.Goal oriented projects have been

funded by National R&D Centre, but part of them, submitted by SMEs has been selected and

administered by The Polish Federation of Engineering Associations NOT.

The other types of research projects distinguished from all kinds od international research

are:

international projects: international projects co-funded by national agency with support

from abroad (no return rules) and

international projects financed exclusively from national sources (no co-funding from

abroad).

They are described below.

Agencies funding research projects in Poland during 2008-2010

The Ministry of Science and HigherEducation, MNSW

The main role in financing of R&D and project funding in Poland in the period of analysis

(2008-2009) until actual gradual delegation of responsibilities for research projects funding

to the National Centr e for Research and Development (NCBR established in 2007)) and to

National Centre for Science (set up in 2010 NCN) played the Ministry of Science and Higher

Education MNSW (in 2008 and 2009 the NCBR funds were very limited at the beginning of

its existence and gradually have grown up, until now).

The Ministry was/is responsible for formulation, - and up to 2010- also for implementation

and evaluation of higher education, science and technology policy and R&D funding. The

MNSW (set up in 2002), replaced the State Committee for Scientific Research (KBN)

established in 1991. The funding structure up to 2008 was almost completely centralized,

since the Ministry of Science kept keeps the whole state budget for science differently to the

other european countries where also the other ministries have their own research money for

mission research. In Poland, there none of the ministries (except marginal research money

for international programs, of the Ministry of Economy) have own budgetary funds for

11

research except Ministry of Regional affairs administering sectoral funds. MSHE had/has

strong power in research policy formulation and up to 2007 execution and research funding

including project funding; the other bodies involved in project funding described below were

strongly dependent on the Ministry both in allocation of money (NOT) and in policy

formulation (NCBR); they had only a very small share of budget funds at their disposal.

Up to 2010 the Minister was advised by the Science Council (RN) which constituted a

formal representation of research community . It consisted of maximum 70 members of whom

33 were elected by scientific community, the others the Minister appointed from among

candidates designated by other ministers and organizations of research institutions. The

Council was divided into four organs of the Council):

The Committee on Scientific and Technology Policy (CSTP) gave opinions on draft

documents concerning the state’s science and technology policy and its innovation policy as

well as bills and economic and financial arrangements concerning the development of science

and technology. The other organs of RN were the Committee on Research for the

Development of Science (KRN), the Committee on Research for the Development of the

Economy (KRG) and the Committee of Appeal. (KO)

These two Commissions of the KBN were involved in the process of assessment of research

institutions and peer review evaluation of various applications within all channels of funding

from the state budget. Hence, their functions were connected to the process of distribution of

money for science.

Besides the formal Science Council standing committees the Minister set up, if it was

required, for a limited period of time, specialised or interdisciplinary groups, consisting of

members of the Council’s Committees mentioned above as well as of competent external

experts involved in institutional evaluation and peer review of research projects including

international ones. But it must be mentined that Research Council was not a body separated

from and independent of the MNSW and all funding decisions were made by the Minister.

Since 2008 the responsibilities of the Minister has been gradually diminishing, the new

bodies NCBR and NCN have been set up they have taken over a part the responsibilities of

the Ministerd RN, concerning project funding sharing responsibility for management and

evaluation of international projects. According to new regulations of 2010 a new body –a

Committee of Evaluation of the Research Units (KEJN) was set up within the Ministry, with

responsibilities for the evaluation of research organizations preceeding the institutional

funding.

National Research and Development Centre, NCBR

The other most important institutions , during years 2007-2009 in the period of

transformation, besides of the MNSW, was National Research and Development Centre. It is

a state body set up by the legal Act in 2007 whose autonomy increased according to 2010

12

regulations. The purpose of the NCBR was/is to coordinate the country’s fragmented applied

research for the benefit of economy and society (public health, public administration, culture)

and to support the Minister of Science and Higher Education in the performance of science

and innovation policy. In particular NCBR will play a role of coordinator and a centre

managing big strategic R&D programs including energy, IT, biotechnology, new materials

and production technologies but –as mentioned earlier- also a part of international projects.

The Centre is jointly funded from state budget for science (in 2008 ca 10% of governmental

funds for science were transfered to NCBR) but is administering also international programs.

The strategic programs have been established through National Program for Scientific

Research and Development (amendment to the Act on the Principles of science financing,

July 15 2007) which replaced National Framework Program abolished in July 2007. The

agency internal organization (ruled by the statutes) and the procedures of selection of

research projects have been determined in details by the legal regulations of 2010 Act. The

NCBR was first one of two agencies to be created as part of Poland’s drive to reform its

research sector. A new agency called Centre for Scientific Research (NCN) was set up by new

regulations of 2010. It is financing basic research nad a part of international projects.

The other bodies involved in research support

A body funding national research projects

The Polish Federation of Engineering Associations – NOT is a public organization affiliating

branch Engineering Associations representing all fields of technology. It has at its disposal 51

Houses of Technology all over the country, providing their members with modern technology

equipment ready for rendering different services. Since 2001 up to 2010 the Innovation

Centre of NOT, under the agreement signed with the Minister of Science and Information

Society Technologies, it has managed the program of goal-oriented projects of SMEs: called

contests for co-financing the goal-oriented projects submitted and co-funded from state

budget and from funds of small and medium enterprises (SMEs). The co-operation of the

Ministry of Science with the NOT was a part of a larger tendency in Polish administration

directed at gradual decentralization and outsourcing of public tasks.

Bodies funding international projects

While the Ministry was funding mostly investigator-driven grants and a part of international

programs, NOT was funding only goal-oriented projects from SMEs, NCBR was funding

solicited projects (ordered, within national framework and strategic R&D programs) and

goal-oriented projects. In area of international cooperation, MNSW and NCBR were co-

funding (together with funds from abroad) or fully funding most of research within

international programmes: Polish performers of international projects (description of

international cooperation in par. 3.1.

From the other bodies involved in support of research carried out by international teams each

of them was involved in funding only one kind of programme.

13

Between 2008 and 2009 the Centre for Information Processing OPI, was administering and

funding the Polish Norwegian Fund.

The Ministry of Economy was administering ESA programme.

The Central Office of Measures, GUM, was responsible for EMRC programme.

The International Fund- Visegrad Fund created by the cooperating governments was

resposible for its own support programme.

In 2008 most of money for programmes and projects of international cooperation was in

hands of the MNSW. Due to the evolutionary character of transformation orf research

organization the process of decentralization of reserch funding has taken several years. As a

result between 2008 and 2011 in several cases the research projects being a part the particular

programme could be funded partly by the MNSW and- in the following years –by the new

body- NCBR. For instance several ERA-NET programmes during 2008 and 2009 were partly

funded by the Ministry and partly by NCBR. Such programmes as ENIAC, AAL, ERA-

NET, ERA-NET+, EURO-STARS, Eureka or ESA were gradually transfered to NCBR since

2008 but in 2009 stil several of these programmes were funded both from MNSW and NCBR.

European Union Framework Programmes were managed and supervised by the MNSW up to

2010 and later transfered to NCN, also the funding of other international programmes of basic

research were transfered to NCN in 2010 and 2011- like European Research Council

programmes- Eurocores, NSF programmes Polish Norwegian Cooperation operated before

by the OPI and several programmes from bilateral cooperation (with Luxemburg, Germany,

Singapour Research Council, Israel, Taiwan).

Joint and Open Research Programme (JOREP) National Report: Poland

TABLE 4: Overview of the main funding agencies and instruments in Poland 2008-2009 (does not cover instruments of minor importance and agencies funding only one single programme

National Agencies International agencies Research councils Innovation

agencies Ministries and other government agencies

European Union Other international agencies and programs

Agency National Research and Development Centre

Polish Federation of Engineering Associations

Ministry of Science and Higher Education

Framework programs European Space Agency COST, EUREKA ESF

Main instruments Thematic(ordered) goal-oriented projects Goal-oriented –industry-university cooperative projects Development projects International projects co-funded from national and international sources International projects not co-funded by foreign sources

Goal-oriented (industry- university cooperation) projects

Investigator- driven projects (grants) International co-funded International not co-funded

Main Beneficiaries HEIs, research institutes SMEs exclusively/ with research establishments or HEIS as subcontractors

Higher education institutions, PAS institutes, public research branch (government) institutes,

Higher education institutions, public research institutes, private companies

All research sectors

15

2.4.Public research funding: some quantitative data

Complete data on project funding based on OECD project are not yet available.

3. Mapping joint and open programs

This section provides a detailed mapping of joint and open programs in the concerned countries with

sufficient detail to draw conclusions on future JOREP data collection.

3.1. An introductory overview

3.1.1.Joint programming

Since 1990 Poland has been trying to participate in many international research initiatives. But as I

mentioned above, even before 1990 Polish scientists were involved in international research ( i.e. projects

carried out in CERN). After 1990 Poland became a regular member of the most important international

organizations in various research areas – EUREKA or COST. In the domain of space research Poland

participates in European Space Agency. In the field of EURATOM nad Polish involvement in EU

organizations Polish research teams participate in several research networks- however, their involvement

has been limited partly because of limited funds and also partly because Poland has not have well developed

expensive research facilities (we do not use nuclear energy as a source of energy- no power plant using such

energy). As I mentioned above for some reasons Polish researchers are not very active in applying with

projects for international funding, but Polish MNSW is trying to create conditions enhancing Polish research

teams in research cooperation (the Ministry launched a program financing a preparation phase of

applications to international organizations; besides, there is national co-funding or funding of projects which

have been succesfull in aplying to international organizations/ programs for funding. The share of Polish

teams in European research is gradually increasing- Poland takes part im most of European Science

Foundation Schemes –European Collaborative Research Programmes -Eurocores. Also participation in

European Union Framework Programs is increasing – the process is developing especially after Polish

accession to the European Union, when Poland became an equal partner of Western countries. In most of

international programs decision on Polish participation in new schemes or initiatives in made by the Minister

after reccomendation of the Science Council and actual participation depends on the interests of research

groups. As description of international cooperation in MNSW annual budget reports suggests, many

decisions on Polish participation in ESF or ERA-NET and other programs is made a la carte. Besides

programs of cooperation on EU level, there are several intergovernmental initiatives in which Poland

participate like Visehrad Fund or INTAS where several countries from postcommunist countres carry out

joint research. Especially bilateral cooperation is important for Poland, Particularly cooperation with

“traditional” Polish partners (where Polish scientists went on scholarships during communism) like France,

USA or Germany(unfortunately, some of these programmes of cooperation are not covered by the JOREP

joint or opened programmes, the others were not significant in 2008 or 2009 and were excluded from further

16

description) . Such contacts with well developed countries with outstanding research achievements are the

most important since Polish research teams upgrade their quality, get experienced and learn from them.

3.1.2. Opening of national programs

As a general rule, nationality of the researcher and research institution is not a criterion for eligibility to

participation in Polish research programmes. What is required instead, is the employment of the researcher in

Polish research institution or – in case of research institutions – their location in Poland; besides, such

research establishment must be legal entity. But in Poland, there is no specific program dedicated to

funding researchers from abroad – instead, Polish side is rather a beneficient receiving money for research

from abroad (i.e. Norwegian Fund and other programs) than supporter of foreing performers.

3.1.3.Mapping the programs

Before presenting the mapping connected to JOREP project, I must mention a general philosophy of funding

for international cooperation in Poland, since several specific features of Polish system stem from this

general policy assumptions.

Except for institutional funds supporting some international research projects being a consequence of

international governmental agreements of cooperation (see 2.2.), all streams (channels) of funding

international cooperation in motion in 2008 and 2009 were outlined in executive regulations (executive order

of the Minister of 25th of September 2007 to the Act on Principles of Financing Science of October 8 2004).

The general principles of support of international cooperation are subordinated to a general policy purpose-

to increase and enhance the participation of Polish research teams in international programs,. As a result,

there are two important features of support for international research:

1. Support for all kind of involvement in international cooperation of Polish research teams; it

embraces also co-funding projects, which, in other countries, are funded exclusively from

international agencies or EU budget.

2. The government supplies funds not only for completion of research projects but also for

covering costs of preparation an application to international organization or program, for

contribution ( or subscription ) to international research organizations or research facilities,

for research carried out by Polish performers in international facilities, for funding of

national contact points and so on (in structure of the government all these items are

included).This kind of funding is not covered by JOREP project, but has been included in

Polish report because it presents the national context of international projects support in

Poland:

There are several streams of financing international cooperation in Poland –they create general rules for

all forms of support for international research:

1. National funding of participation of Polish research teams carrying out research in international

institutions like CERN of JRC (Polish side is paying the contribution to these institutes and

additionally is funding Polish research teams)- it corresponds to A category of JOREP

classification and is not covered by JOREP project

17

2. International projects co-funded from Polish sources of Polish participants in international

programs with no return rules –it concerns programs within EU and other international

programs, which are funded from international international sources and get addidional funding

from national sources (examples: European Framework Program, ESA,). This kind of

funding corresponds to category B1 and B2 of JOREP project.

Project is eligible to get Polish co-financing after initial acceptance (or positive assessment) by international

organization or consortium. Applicant may apply for Polish co-funding to cover project costs up to 60% of

total costs of the project but not more than 100% of planned Polish contribution to the project financing.

Every research project is selected by relevant Committee of the Science Council (or a director in National

R&D Centre in case of administration of these projects by the Centre), after its review by panel of experts

from relevant specialization or by interdisciplinary team or working task force according to the same

several criteria:

- The significance of the research for priority programs in Poland

- Access to research results of the other program participants including possibility of practical use

acquired knowledge, skills or technology in Poland

- Category (in ranking exercise) of research units (primary statutory funding)

3. International projects without co-funding (funded exclusively from national sources, like

Eurocores of European Science Foundation, ESF): correspond with B3 in JOREP

classification.

A prerequisite for eligibility of research units to get funding from national sources is a requirement to

prove the participation in international program or initiative and acceptance by international agency.

All international projects are reviewed by Science Council panels (if coordinated and funded by the MNSW)

or by expert panels set up by National Research and Development Centre (if the Centre is funding the

program), by OPI (Polish-Norwegian Fund). Additionally, every application for projects funded from

national budget only is assessed by three reviewers (representing science field/discipline relevant for the

project), before review by panel of experts

Criteria for selection of this kind of proposals are more elaborated than evaluation criteria for co-funded

projects since the later proposals are reviewed twice- by the international organization and Polish funding

agency. The review criteria in this category of projects are the same for all kind of proposals and concern:

- Scientific quality of the project

- Track record and competences of project team, research equipment available and other eligibility

criteria

- Innovativeness of proposed tasks comparing to the state of knowledge

- Social or economic utility of planned results and real possibility of practical use (or

commercialization) or research results

18

- Access to research results commonly achieved by program participants including possibility of

practical implementation of acquired knowledge, skills or technology

- Significance of the project for development of international cooperation in science and technology

- Justification of planned budget including purchasing the equipment relevant to project scope and

subject

- Results of evaluation of research unit fulfillment of previously completed research purposes

Projects are funded for maximum 5 years and financing may be prolonged for the next 2 years.

4. International research projects included in international programs or initiatives, or conquests,

announced for bilateral or multilateral cooperation (each country is funding its own research

teams).- corresponds to C: joint programs between national funding agencies- Corresponds to

C in JOREP classification

In several cases when Poland provide financial contribution to joint international program or initiative,

money from Polish agency is transferred to this research program, which funds directly research projects

from Poland: these programs are Vishegrad Funds programmes or Polish- Norway Fund

D: programmes of national agencies opened to performers abroad- does not exist

3.2. Participation of Poland in European and international programs1

For the mapping we make use of the classification of these programs provided in the JOREP tender in the

following categories

B. European/international agencies funding national research groups:

B.1. and B.2. Programs managed and funded by international agencies and /or European Commuission

throug its budgets FPs (established through international agreements) and funded from direct contributions

from national budgets. In Poland besides such national contribution they are additionally co-funded by

national sources.

1 According to JOREP classification (but not covered by JOREP project) there is also A.Participation in European and international facilities. Supranational research performers (not covered by JOREP) In Poland there are the following solutions: A.1. International facilities funded jointly by different national states. funding based on international agreements (CERN) Polish research projects co-funded from MNSW A.2. Facilities funded from EU budget (JRC). Proposals of Polish performers co-funded from EU and Polish sources (MNSW) A list of the most important international performers with Polish participation funded in 2008 covers

- CERN - JRC Joint Research Centre - ILL Institute M. von Laue-Paul Langevin - ESRF European Synchrotron Radiation Facility - DESY

(Source Kozlowski 2010)

19

The main features of Polish research policy concerning all categories of programs are described in sections

above. Below there is a list of the most important European and international agencies and programs funding

or coordinating research projects with Polish funding or co-funding of Polish research performers:

B1. ESA. European Space Agency

B.1. RFCS Research Fund for Coal and Steel

B.1. EURATOM

B.3.2. EUREKA

B.3.2. EUREKA-EUROSTARS

B.1. COST European Cooperation in the Field of Scientific and Technical Research

B.2. FP, EU Framework Programs (NOTICE THAT Polish side co-finances directly participation of Polish

research teams)

B.3.1. ERA-Net schemes

B.3.1. Joint European Programmes under 185 AAL - Ambient Assisted Living

B.3.2. Eurocores ESF

B.3. ETP, European Technology Platforms B.

B.3. 1. JTI/ Joint Technology Initiatives,

ENIAC, CLEAN SKY

B.3. IEE, Intelligent Energy for Europe,

B.3. ESF European Science Foundation: EUROCORES

B.3. ERA-NET, ERA-NET+

B.3. EMBC

20

TABLE 5. European and international programs with Polish Participation B.1. and B.2.

Program Funding/managing agency

Polish funding agency

Type Polish participation Availability of data on funding

European Space Agency

ESA

MNSW B-1.1. Participation of Poland since 2007. (earlier, since 2002 Poland has had a status of cooperating state -PECS) In 2008 Poland participated in programs COL Satellite Mission BEPI COLOMBO European Space Agency on Mercury and others like Rosetta, Herschel, Mars-Express, Venus- Express, Participation of Polish research projects is co-funded by ESA and by MSHE after review and recommendation of Science Council

Data not published Not available at the moment

Framework Program FP (not covered by JOREP)

E. C.

MNSW B.2.1. Participation before Polish accession to EU- in 2004 on individual basis. From the beginning of 6th FP full participation (before accession 50% of projects of RP were initiated) Program is co-funded from FP and Polish sources- directly by MSHE. Project were reviewed by Panels of Science Council, Polish co-funding up to 60 % of total costs Main beneficiaries: all sectors (government, HEIs, industry/business

Data not published Nor available at the moment

EURATOM (Not covered by JOREP)

EU FP MNSW B.2.1. Research program in area of nuclear energy. Poland became a full member in 2007 but cooperating also earlier- but still the scope of research is very limited Program is co-funded from FP and Polish sources- directly by MSHE. Project are reviewed by Panels of Science Council, Polish co-funding up to 60 % of total costs Main beneficiaries- Research institutes in area of nuclear research

Data not published Nor available at the moment

21

Name of the program Agreement (Memorandum of understanding) between Polish MSHE and

French National Institute of Agricultural Research (INRA)

Type Rather application oriented Description

Cooperation focused on agriculture research of mutual interests

Participating agencies MNSW and INRA Type of projects and topics

Projects in relevant areas

Project duration Competition of applications: every 3 years Origin of funding Co-funded from both sides Funding mode

Joint support from both sides.

Budget (Polish part) Not available Beneficiaries

Research Iistitutions in relevant areas

History

2007 signed memorandum of understanding

Duration 3 years Submission

Joint projects assessed by French- Polish Steering Committee

Evaluation From among 28 research proposals 4 were selected Data sources Information about funding not public Aggregated data No data Confidentiality of data As above website http://www.nauka.gov.pl/ministerstwo/wspolpraca-z-zagranica/wspolpraca-

dwustronna/mapa-swiata/- data on agreement, not execution and funding

Name of the program Bilateral cooperation programs between MNSW and DFG Deutsche

Forschungemeinschaft

Type

Cover 2 mechanisms of DFG : Sachbeihilfe and Sonderforschungsbereichte/Transregio

Description

Purrpose of Interegio- to improve excellence and setting up centres of excellence. Program concentrate on interdisciplinary research and young scientists

Participating agencies MSHE, DFG Type of projects and topics

Young scientists, interdisciplinary research

Project duration Project within Interregio program may be funded up to 12 years in 4-year phases Origin of funding For Polish partners-MNSW Funding mode Polish research teams funded as so called international projects not co-funded

from foreign sources (see description above) Budget (Polish part) No data Beneficiaries All History n.a. Duration n.a. Submission Applications submitted and proceeded in parallel to both agencies –for Polish

application to the MSHE assignment of research partner and his research contribution must be designed.

Evaluation See above Proposals reviewed according to national rules. Polish support only for proposals accepted by the DFG. Proposals may be assessed also by joint international panel

22

Interregio: similar rules of evaluation and submission Data sources Data on agreement available Aggregated data No data Confidentiality of data Data on agreement available (public) on website, data on funding not available Website http://www.nauka.gov.pl/ministerstwo/wspolpraca-z-zagranica/wspolpraca-

dwustronna/mapa-swiata/

Name of the program NIDA/NIH Program of International Collaboration on Drug Abuse USA Type

Program of international collaboration on all kind of drags abuses (covers several initiatives)

Description

Research funding program launched by the NSF to promote cooperation and support international research teams and networks Open to research groups in other countries

Participating agencies National Institute on Drug Abuse NIH, USA and other countries (in Poland research is funded by MNSW)

Type of projects and topics

All projects relvant to the program title

Project duration n.a. Origin of funding Polish partners funded from MNSW Funding mode

Polish research teams funded as international projects not co-funded from abroad

Budget (Polish part) N.a. Beneficiaries No restriction History n.a. Duration n.a. Submission American teams submit proposals to NIDA, Polish ones- to MNSW Evaluation As all international research projects not co-funded from abroad Data sources Info on funding not public Aggregated data No data Confidentiality of data available content of agreement, not funding data Website http://www.nauka.gov.pl/ministerstwo/wspolpraca-z-zagranica/wspolpraca-

dwustronna/mapa-swiata/

Name of the program Materials World Network (MWN) National Science Foundation Type Investigator driven projects Description

Research funding program launched by the NSF to promote cooperation and support international research teams and networks Open to research groups in other countries

Participating agencies NSF and funding agencies from other countries (in Poland research is funded by MNSW)

Type of projects and topics

All projects relevant to the program title

Project duration n.a. Origin of funding Polish partners funded from MNSW Funding mode

Polish research teams funded as international projects not co-funded from abroad

Budget (Polish part) N.a. Beneficiaries N.a. History n.a. Duration n.a. Submission American teams submit proposals to NSF, Polish ones- to MNSW

23

Evaluation The same as all international research projects not co-funded from abroad Data sources Info on funding not public Aggregated data No data Confidentiality of data Not public Website http://www.nauka.gov.pl/ministerstwo/wspolpraca-z-zagranica/wspolpraca-

dwustronna/mapa-swiata/- data on agreement not on execution

Name of the program NSF International Collaboration in Chemistry Type

Research funding program launched by the NSF to promote cooperation and support international research teams and networks Open to research groups in other countries Investigator-driven projects

Description Research funding program launched by the NSF to promote cooperation and support international research teams and networks

Participating agencies NSF and funding agencies from other countries (in Poland research is funded by MNSW

Type of projects and topics

All projects relevant to the program title

Project duration n.a. Origin of funding Polish partners funded from MSHE Funding mode Polish research teams funded as international projects not co-funded from abroad Budget (Polish part) n.a. Beneficiaries No restriction History n.a. Duration n.a. Submission American teams submit proposals to NSF, Polish ones- to MNSW Evaluation The same as all international research projects not co-funded from abroad Data sources Info on funding not public Aggregated data No data Confidentiality of data Not public Website http://www.nauka.gov.pl/ministerstwo/wspolpraca-z-zagranica/wspolpraca-

dwustronna/mapa-swiata/

Name of the program Science and technology Cooperation between Poland and Austria Type All forms of cooperation, all kind of projects, all disciplines Description

Agreement covers all research relationships Program preparing for future cooperation within European research programs. Covers cooperation between higher education institutions and Academies of Sciences in both countries

Participating agencies MSHE Poland, Federal Ministry of Education, Science and Culture Type of projects and topics

Not defined

Project duration Not defined Origin of funding Each side funding Project according to national rules Funding mode In Poland research projects are funded from statutory funds – no other funding is

supplied Budget (Polish part) Not available- data on the level of research institutions Beneficiaries All History Agreement signed in 2006 Duration of program 2007-2009 Submission To MSHE for statutory funding covering research resulting from

24

intergovernmental agreements Evaluation As a part of statutory applications Data sources N.a. Aggregated data N.a. Confidentiality of data N.a. Website On agreement http://www.nauka.gov.pl/ministerstwo/wspolpraca-z-

zagranica/wspolpraca-dwustronna/mapa-swiata/

Name of the program Agreement between Poland and Czech Republic Type Typical intergovernmental agreement

Joint Committee for Cooperation in Science and Technology set up for coordination

Description Research within Executive program for cooperation within the Field of S&T Participating agencies MSHE and relevant czech agency Type of projects and topics

No restriction

Project duration Up to 2 years Origin of funding Research projects are funded by both countries according to national regulations Funding mode

Costs of research of Polish performers covered by statutory funds Polish funding covers travel exp. of Polish teams to Czech Rep. and accommodation of Czech teams in Poland; Czech side- the reverse

Budget (Polish part) Data on the level of research institutions Beneficiaries All research institutions History Agreement signed in 2000 but cooperation for many years Duration Submission Projects submitted to national agencies and assessed according to national rules. Evaluation n.a. Data sources n.a. Aggregated data n.a. Confidentiality of data n.a. Website Data on agreement not executions nor funding

http://www.nauka.gov.pl/ministerstwo/wspolpraca-z-zagranica/wspolpraca-dwustronna/mapa-swiata/

25

3.5. National programmes funding performers abroad

According to the definition of opened programmes provided in the previous paragraphs (see 3.1.2.) no open

programmes appear to be available in Poland.

As a general rule the researchers of foreign origin or citizenship may apply for funding if they have the legal

address in Poland and work in research institution (for more details on eligibility - see section 3.1.2).

Generally these may be the programs for which an applicant from abroad can participate without national

funding, being employed in Polish research institution. But there is no encouragement or even information

for researchers about such possibility. It would be difficult to find out how many foreign researchers are

really engaged in national programs since such informations are not collected by any institution.

3.6. Cases of exclusion: revision of the national perimeter after the data

collection

Besides general cases of exclusion defined according to the methodology developed for the Jorwep project

at early stage of the data collection the perimeter has been further revised after chacking the programmes in

detailes during the data collection. So far a final list of programmes have been developed as well as a list of

programmes excluded by the perimeter with motivation for exclusion.

The motivations for exclusions have been the following:

- Programmes do not fit the Jorep definition of joint programmes (do not fund research but rather

coordination or networking of research initiatives/ activities ).

- The scale of funding is too small to be relevant or calls issued are episodic.

- Bilateral agreement with other countries mainly to support researchers mobility However, I did not

exclude include such schemes if such funding seem to be an inevitable part of research cooperation

within a joint project (such situation is in case of research projects resulting from bilateral

agreements where also other costs exist (they may be covered within a separate funding scheme or

payed from statutory institutional funds.

- Schemes funding joint workshops and seminars.

TABLE 6. The list of programmes excluded from the perimeter and motivations for exclusion

Identification code according to JOREP database

Name of the programme Motivation for exclusion

PEU009 E-RARE Poland participates as observer PL006 Agreement on Polish- French

Cooperation in S+T Mostly mobility

PL007 Cooperatio Programme MNSW-INRA France

Mostly mobility

PL008 Agreement- Memo of Understanding MNSW-CNRS

Mostly mobility

PL009 Agreement MNSW- DFG Germany No call/ no funding in 2008-2009 PL010 Agreement MNSW-NSF Low level od funding PL012 Science and technology cooperation No funding in 2008-2009

26

agrement- MNSW-Italy PL013 Agreement with gov. of Peru Low level of funding PL014 Agreement with gov. Of Equador Low level of funding PL016 Agreement with Portugal Low level of funding PL017, Agreement with Hungary Low level of funding PL018 Agreement with Wallons Low level of funding PL019 Agreement with Spain No funding in 2008-9 PL020 DAAD Germany No funding 2008-9 PL020 S+T Cooperation Executive

Programme 2008-2009 Low level of funding

PL022 Agreement- Belgium Low level of funding PL023 Agreement Bielorus Low level of funding PL024 China Low level of funding PL025 Canada Low level of funding PL026 Russia Low level of funding Pl027 Slovenia Low level of funding PL028 Turkey Low level of funding PL029 Korea Low level of funding PL030 Czech Rep. Low level of funding PL031 Greece Low level of funding PL032 South Africa Low level of funding

Remarks:

1/The list does not cover cooperation wchich is not based on intergovernment agreements. However, It does

include cooperation based on intergevernment agreements but funded not from special government

programme money but directly from funds of research institutions. Within restricted paramete area I

inserted programmes with the highest funding and/or highest significance (for instance ERA-NETS do not

get much funding but are considered by the government documentation a highly significant).

2/.Because of lack of information it is not clear what is the mobility component in their funding, some of

these programme could be probably excluded because funding concentrates on mobility.

4. Overall assessment and discussion

In previous sections I mentioned about obstacles to widening participation of Polish performers in

international programs.

Most of research in Poland is still investigators-driven, a small fraction are programmed research however

various initiatives on European level are gradually changing the situation.

Poland government has neglected area of development of science and technology and proper level of funding

- it has been important obstacle to the participation in important international initiatives which require critical

mass of funding.

There is no policy towards opening of research programs –and no understanding for significance of

attracting excellent researchers from abroad.

At the beginning of the time period covered by JOREP projrct Poland had a centralized research policy most

of research has been funded directly by the MNSW up to 2008 when responsibility for international

programmes has been gradually transfered to a new research council NCBR. (Except the NCBR only several

international programmes were managed by individual organizations to which such responsibility for a

articular programme was commissioned by the Ministry). In spring 2010 a package of Acts concerning

27

science was passed by the Polish Parliament– as a result position of the NCBR has been strangthened and a

new council responsible for basic research funding National Research Centre- NCN) was created taking over

gradually responsibility for coordination of international cooperation in the area of basic research.

Unfortunately the changes after 2009 are not covered by JOREP analysis. As a result of 2010 reconstruction

science policy will be decentralized and responsibilities mowe transparent. However, it must be mentioned

that in case of bilateral cooperation the most of such research cooperation is carried out in a decentralized

manner- individual research organizations have research links and cooperation with individual institutions

abroad and such ties do not require intergovernmental agreements. Most of such connections concentrate on

mobility, joint conferences or exchange of researchers. In fact such research connections with foreign

partners pave the way to participation of Polish partners in international or european programmes.

Unfortunately, if such cooperation is funded from institutional funding of research organizations or from

grants of individual researchers, there is no informationa about them in any kind of statistics, may be besides

the annual reports of individual organizations.

4.1. Availability of data and methodological issues

General remarks.

In Poland, there is very aggregated level of statistical data published (Central Statistical Office) and publicly

available, selected data on international programmes enabling preparation a list of JOREP programmes ,

selection programmes to restricted area and programme descriptors are available in the following

WRITTEN documents or sources:

- on web-site of NCBR, where annual reports are presented but most of data from the reports are not

presented in the same way not only between years but also among programmes. Additionally, there

are only selected data concerning years when NCBR exist, so there are missing data on programmes

before 2008

- in confidencial annual reports of the Ministry (MNSW), unfortunately the way these reports are

prepared and data presended in constantly changing and not all information on programmes is

available. – There was no information concerning programme descriptors but some data on a list of

programmes and their funding- particularly bi-lateral cooperation.

Selected data on international research projects which are coordinated/funded by NCBR are partly available-

presented data are on website of NCBR and cover years 2008 and 2009. So far as projects coordinated by

other organizations (a.e. MNSW) are concerned – selected data on projects have been available up the end

of 2010 on ministerial wep-pages but they ”disapeared” when the transfer of their coordination and funding

of these programs began – since this time no information on projects previously funded by the MNSW has

been publicly available. (selected available data concerns only programmes coordinated by the NCBR)

Data collection on JOPREP programmes in Poland was organized in three steps. First- collection of list of

descriptors, second- data on funding and third- data on beneficiaries.

28

During the first step between April and July 2011 the filling of full list of descriptors on joint programmes

and agencies was collected . But before a list of descriptors was prepared a list of all programmes covered by

the JOREP projec was prepared and a list of programmes for restricted area. These data have been checked

step by step by the NIFU who address questions concerning inconsistencies or missing data. Data have been

validated through a further check in September 2011. Nevertherless differences in availability of data have to

be underlined with respect to descriptors collected.

Step one: programme descriptor (based on selection of JOREP programmes and choice the programmes for

selected area).

The list of programmes qualified for JOREP was performed:

- on the basis of the list provided by JOREP team (PEU 001 - PEU 046);

- on data from two kind of reports: annual reports for 2008 and 2009 of the Ministry of Science and

Higher Education ( not published) and annual reports of the National R+D Centre (NCBR) for the

same years (available on the website of the NCBR) ;

- on the basis of website of the MNSW department of international cooperation (suddenly dissolved in

Autumn 2010).

The Ministry was asked to validate the list of programmes and their description, but no feedback information

from them was received.

A list of selected programmes for restricted area was prepared –the choice was based on the amount of

funds spent on the programmes and/or official priorities declared in official /political presentations

(unfortunately no answer was received when asking for validation of this information).

Programme descriptors for several programmes was based on data found at the MNSW web-side (just

before the page was phased out) but not for all. A part of data was found in annual reports of the NCBR

supplemented by the information from the officers (see below), and part was received from the MNSW, the

rest of info on programmes coordinated by the other bodies MG, OPI was found at web-pages and/or

received upon request from these bodies.

In case of NCBR programs after negotiations there were several contacts with several programmes

coordinators. According to them the list provided by JOREP (PEU 001-PEU 046) was not valid because

funding of several programs began in 2010 and a list concerned 2009; at the same time there were not all

ERA-net programs included on the list- (they were checked and they emerged to have been launched but not

funded). Additional data was asked and information on descriptors but most of them have been chosen by the

national expert.

Step two: funding flows to agencies/data delivered 3 June 2011

The collection of data on funding for JOREP programmes (except for the NCBR) was very difficult because

the annual reports mentioned earlier provide only selected information on the level of particular programme.

Sometimes in these reports there is a mixture of information on intentions and plans but no systematic data

29

on calls, selection procedures or information how much money has been spent on particular programme in a

given year. It is impossible to find out data on programme budgets and how the budget for particular

programme was spent especially for period of several years 2000-2009.

In ministerial reports there was no information about the role of the agency, national role, beneficiary

sectors- in fact the information on who can be potentially beneficiaries of some programmes which I got

from the MNSW officials was wrong because they misunderstood questions in JOREP Questionnaire. The

similar lack of understanding was in the NCBR- i had to check by myself their mistakes looking for

inconsistence in answers. Further checks in order to be sure whether all mistakes were founded are needed.

In annual reports of the Ministry the year when the Polish agency officially signed an agreement and when it

launched the funding is not distinguished. In case of bilateral cooperation which was coordinated by the

Ministry no data was available in the annual reports including beneficiaries except some data on total

funding in selected years.

Several supplementary sources were used with respect to annual reports of the agencies for different kind of

information :

- web pages of the agencies (in case of MNiSW there was “historical” information on development of

bilateral cooperation on web-pages a page phase out). In case of Ministry of Economy (MG) more or

less information on ESA programme were found but the contact with person responsible for

coordination was impossible.

- web-pages of some of beneficiaries: searching the data in internet several data were found on pages

of institutes participating in a particular programme (EFDA, EM RP).

- phone consultations with several researchers participating in programmes or managing projects.

In case of programmes coordinated by the NCBR information were retrieved about a significant part of the

programmes and their funding from the agency but the data could be only partial- because the NCBR was

established in 2008 and responsibility for funding of programmes was transferred from the Ministry in 2008

and 2009 gradually- it was suggested by the NCBR officials that a part of funding for these programmes has

been still supplied by the Ministry- and the NCBR funded only a part of programmes if a call was in 2008

but it was not possible to get in touch with a person responsible at the MNSW.

Step three: funding to beneficiaries

In case of the NCBR in several programmes the officials were not able to answer not only who are

beneficiaries but also in which programmes there could be private beneficiaries- they referred to legal

regulations which did not allow for it but at the same time some private beneficiaries were found in several

programmes. It is probably rather impossible that different general rules regulate different kind of

programmes differently and assumed that funding of private beneficiaries was not forbidden. Data were

received for several programmes but for most of them no information are available. In case of programmes

coordinated by the MNSW there is no information about beneficiaries in any kind of source of data.

30

4.2. Problems encountered with data availability and measures taken to

overcome problems

There were two kind of difficulties in completion of JOREP work

- no access to agency officials who keep the information not available from any other sources,

- sometimes wrong data provided or wrong interpretation of questions in case the data was delivered.

The way to overcome these difficulties resulting from lacking data would be a contact with persons

responsibile for international cooperation or individual programmes. Unfortunately, since 2006 there were

three reorganizations at the MNSW, a department of international cooperation does not exist any more and a

majority of officers changed a job. The persons responsible now for international cooperation at the MNSW

were not informed about the programmes coordinated by the other people and were not cooperative. In case

of NCBR there were also personnel fluctuations between 2006 and 2010. The people who stayed or took

over the responsibility for the programmes coordinated by the other officers were not well informed, and

even if some wanted to help, some of them did not understand the categories used in JOREP pproject (they

did not understand terms used in Frascati Manual and their meanings despite the fact that I enclosed to a

questionnaire a small ”dictionary” explaning the terms useful for JOREP study). A serious obstacle to my

contacts and cooperation with officials from the MNSW and NCBR was a constant process of changes in

these organizations- ”a new wave’ of reorgnizations of these institutions began in 2010 and is lasting up to

now- as a result of new legislations- 5 new Acts changing the responsibility of the NCBR, creating a new

research council- The National Research Centre (NCN) who took many responsibilities from the Ministry

and changes in system of funding. The managers in these organizations were involved in the organizational

changes and were not able to to spend a tima on consulting the JOREP project. Newetherless it was possible

get selected information from them. Unfortunately it was not possible not only to receive the required data

from agencies but even directives where to find some sort of information.

5. Discussion on national participation to joint and open R&D programmes

5.1. Participation to joint initiatives (EU and national)

For almost half a century Poland similarly to other communist countries was partly cut off from international

collaboration. May be the situation was not so dramatic as in other communist countries since relatively

many researchers went to the United States or Western Europe for scholarships or attended conferences, and

Polish Academy of Sciences collaborated with foreign partners. Polish government signed agreements

concerning science and technology cooperation with several Western Europe countries and all countries

from communist block. However, comparing to the Western world a general picture was rather not

optimistic, particularly in the area of joint research projects. The cooperation with the West was developing

when much of Polish financial contribution was not required or if the cooperation costs were funded from

foreign sources. Such cooperation was mostly developed in natural sciences and life sciences

31

As a result, after 1990 Poland had to catch up to wealthy Western countries with well developed

international links and set up research networks and all forms of cooperation. However the most important

obstacle to become a partner in research collaboration with Western world has been lack of proper level of

research funding in Poland accompanied by lack of initiatives on the part of Polish research community.

The government authorities stress very low level of participation of Polish research teams in FP and

astonishing low number of applications for research money to the European Science Foundation. It is

accompanied with a very low success rate of submitted proposals. On the other hand Poland is lacking

initiatives and instruments for making Polish research institutions more attractive to foreign partners.

Poland signed a lot of bilateral agreements – but their number is not accompanied by the high level of

funding. Many agreements is focused on mobility and scholarships but not a real joint research. The

agreements on cooperation are usually renewed after expiration. After the II world war Poland had a wide

developed cooperation with socialists countries and Soviet Union- since 1990 such ties were reconstructed as

cooperation with individual pos-socialist countries including separate cooperation with Baltic Countries and

Ukraine, Russia or Bielorus.

A lot of cooperation is arranged and completed on the level of research institutions which are often a

continuation os long term partnership and usually is in the form of mobility, visits to partner institutions or

organization of conferences . Such cooperation is often funded from institutional funds which –according to

the regulations- may be devoted for such cooperative research.

5.2.Level of funding: general observations on national financial commitment on

joint R&D activities

The level od funding of international cooperaation in Poland is dramatically low as a consequence of general

low level of R%D funding and on the other hand as a result of lack of interests on the side of scientific

community

As mentioned earlier, Polish research teams and institutions are not interested in participation in

international cooperation on European level, a relatively small number of researchers react on calls

anouncements. There was no systematic study on the reasons of such passive approach. The anegdotical

information suggest that there is not enough ”backgound money” for the development of research projects

on national level to the point that they may be interested for foreign partners. The other reason is lack of

administrative and technical services helping in project development, the third reason may be too much the

bureaucracy connected to European funds –as complains suggest, and finally- the heavy involvement of

Polish research community in teaching. But the problem od low involvement of Polish reearchers in

international programmes requires a systematic study.

The other interesting issue is that of small involvement of private sector (industrial reseach) in international

projects: the reason for that could be a general weak development of the research in industrial sector in

Poland. On the other hand the knowledge whether the private institutions may apply for International funds

is not widespread and even persons coordinating international programmes sometimes do not have a proper

knowledge on it.

32

5.3 Relationship with other EU initiatives

Joint initiatives are one of forms of european cooperation, but the level of funding of R&D in Poland is so

low that it is simply impossible to assess thereal significance of any kind of international cooperation for

Polish science.

5.4. Relationships with national R&D programmes

Several programmes of international cooperation, like ERA-NETS are a part of national priority research

programmes in various areas and fields, even if their funding is separated. One the other hand the bilateral

cooperation is not connected to national programs – the agreements on cooperation are signed on inter-

government level, but they are rather connected to and complement institutional program of bilateral

cooperation.

33

6. References

Activities of EU member states with regard to the reform of the public research sector, ERAWATCH 2008

CSO (Central Statistical Office) 2010: Nauka i technika w Polsce w 2008 r. (Science and Technology in

Poland in 2008)

EUROSTAT 2010: Science, Technology and Innovation Across Europe in 2009.

Erawatch 2010a: Country Report 2009, Analysis of Policy mix to Foster R&D Investment and to Contribute

to the ERA: Poland, (Walendowski J).

Erawatch 2010b: Activities of EU Member States with Regard to the Reform of the Public Research Base

Kozłowski J. 2010: Statystyka nauki, techniki i innowacji w krajach UE i OECD. Stan i problemy rozwoju.

Ministry of Science and Higher Education Department of Strategy jan.kozlowski@nauka.gov.pl

Kozłowski J. 2010: A questionnaire on national public funding (GBOARD) devoted to trans-nationally

coordinated research (unpublished document)

MNSW: 2000- 2009 (Ministry of Science and Higher Education), Sprawozdania roczne (Annual Reports

plus annexes)

Web pages of the Ministry of Higher Education, National Centre for Research and Development, National

Contact Point (NCP) for UE programs http://www.nauka.gov.pl/ministerstwo/wspolpraca-z-

zagranica/wspolpraca-dwustronna/mapa-swiata/

Interviews with representatives of NCN and MNSW