Study recommends where to direct European support for research after 2028

How can European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF) be used as effectively as possible to support research, development and innovation after 2028? A new study by the Technology Centre Prague identifies areas where European funding can have the greatest impact. The recommendations, based on an analysis of the needs of the Czech R&D&I system and experience with the use of ESIF to date, were among the inputs for the first meeting of the 2028+ Preparatory Committee, an advisory body to the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports responsible for preparing the next programming period.

How the study identified suitable areas for support
The study does not establish new priorities for Czech research policy. Its aim is to provide the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports (MEYS) and other funding providers with a basis for deciding which areas are suitable for funding specifically from ESIF in the post-2028 programming period, considering the specific characteristics of the European Structural and Investment Funds. “It was not enough to determine whether a proposed intervention addressed one of the problems facing Czech research. We focused on whether ESIF represents an appropriate instrument for supporting it and whether, based on previous experience, the funds invested could be expected to have a significant impact,” says Miroslav Kostić, the study's author at the Technology Centre Prague.

The recommendations were developed in three consecutive steps. The first was an analysis of strategic and analytical documents and the resulting identification of the main challenges facing the Czech research, development and innovation system. This was followed by a questionnaire survey among funding providers, who assessed the relevance of the proposed areas of support for addressing these challenges, as well as their financial requirements. The results were subsequently discussed in two focus groups comprising key stakeholders from the R&D&I system. Their task was specifically to assess the suitability of using ESIF for individual areas of support and to consider experience with support from European funds to date.

Open science, research security and international cooperation
One of the areas where the study sees significant scope for European support is open science and research security. In the case of open science, the rationale includes continuity with existing support under the Jan Amos Comenius Operational Programme, as well as the need to stabilise the environment for its further development and coordination at the national level. Research security is linked not only to protecting research data, results and know-how, but also to the credibility of Czech institutions in international cooperation and to creating conditions for investment in R&D&I. The study therefore recommends supporting the implementation of open science principles and systemic preventive measures for research security at research organisations and research-oriented companies.

A strong case for using ESIF also emerges in international mobility and research excellence. The study considers support for mobility between Czech and prestigious foreign institutions to be highly suitable, particularly for early-career researchers. An important factor is its link to European programmes such as MSCA and the expected leverage effect in further strengthening the participation of Czech teams in international cooperation. Co-financing the participation of Czech institutions in European Partnerships is also considered suitable. According to the study, there is considerable interest among Czech research organisations, while an appropriate national support instrument is currently lacking. Other recommended areas include recruiting leading foreign researchers and supporting the return of leading Czech researchers from abroad.

Investment in strategic research infrastructure
A significant group of recommendations concerns strategic research infrastructure. The study identifies as suitable for ESIF both investment in the equipment of strategically important infrastructures and in longer-term projects enabling research organisations to cover part of their infrastructure-related expenditure. The main reasons are the high financial requirements of these interventions and the difficulty of replacing them with other sources of funding. European funding can also complement national funding: for example, the investment component of a project could be financed from ESIF, while the research itself could be funded from national sources.

From research results to innovation
Another area is the transfer of research results into practice. Based on discussions held in the focus groups, the study recommends using ESIF primarily to support the uptake of public-sector research results in applications and business innovation, particularly in the field of emerging and advanced technologies. Public competitions aimed at addressing major societal challenges through RIS3 missions also represent an important opportunity for directing support.

Supporting business R&D and innovation
The study also identifies specific opportunities for European funds in business research and innovation. It considers the use of financial instruments for business R&D—such as loans, guarantees and preferential financing—to be suitable, and particularly highlights equity funds combining structural-fund resources with private investment. These instruments can be appropriate for riskier research projects and start-ups while also enabling private capital to be mobilised.

Support can also be directed towards the development of R&D&I activities in companies, particularly the development of critical technologies, the establishment and development of technological and experimental infrastructures and testbeds for new technologies, as well as the adoption of Industry 4.0 technologies, including automation, robotics and artificial intelligence, particularly in growing companies.

Not all needs are suitable for ESIF
However, not all identified needs are considered suitable for ESIF funding. As the focus-group discussions showed, for example, European funds should no longer support the creation of administrative capacity within research organisations for participation in international projects. This area has received funding over an extended period, and research organisations should now be able to finance such capacity from their own resources.
Long-term research projects are also considered less suitable for ESIF support. The reasons include their greater administrative burden compared with support from national sources, as well as the risks associated with such projects in terms of the need to consistently meet and report monitoring indicators to the European Commission. Another less suitable area comprises interventions involving a large number of financially small projects, which create a considerable administrative burden. One example is support for the uptake of innovation in the public sector, which, according to the study, can be supported more effectively at the national level or through Science for Policy activities at EU level.
The study primarily shows which areas European Structural and Investment Funds can complement national and other European instruments after 2028, particularly where support is financially demanding, has strong links to European programmes, or where other sources are not readily available. The result is not a ranking of Czech research priorities, but a basis for deciding where European funding should be concentrated to achieve the greatest possible impact.