Framework Programme 2

Framework Programme 2
Name	Framework Programme 2
Type	Research funding programme
Start	1977
End	1980
Budget	₣2.5 billion (approx.)
Administered by	European Commission Directorate-General for Research and Innovation
Predecessor	European Economic Community research activities
Successor	Framework Programme 3

Framework Programme 2 was the second multiannual research funding scheme initiated by the European Commission under the auspices of the European Economic Community during the late 1970s. It sought to coordinate transnational research among Member States, link academic institutions such as University of Cambridge and Université Paris-Sorbonne with industrial actors including Siemens and Philips, and align scientific priorities with policy needs reflected in instruments like the Single European Act. The programme built on precedent activities connected to the European Atomic Energy Community and set foundations for later initiatives involving organizations such as the European Research Council and the European Investment Bank.

Background and objectives

Conceived amid economic challenges following the 1973 oil crisis and shifting political landscapes after the Treaty of Rome revisions, the programme responded to calls from institutions including the European Parliament, Council of the European Communities, and national ministries such as the French Ministry of Research and the Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung. Objectives emphasized strengthening competitiveness of firms like Renault and Fiat, improving collaboration among universities such as University of Bologna and Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, and fostering innovation in sectors highlighted by reports from the OECD and the Club of Rome. The scheme targeted technological areas identified in advisory bodies including the COST Association and EUREKA-aligned networks.

Programme structure and thematic areas

The structure comprised centralised calls managed by the European Commission and consortia-based projects linking laboratories such as CERN and industrial research centres like ABB. Thematic areas included electronics and information processing linked to firms like IBM and Thomson-CSF, materials science with actors such as Corus Group and Alcan, energy technologies resonant with the IEA, and biotechnology engaging institutes like the Pasteur Institute. Cross-cutting themes addressed standards and interoperability referenced by ISO deliberations, and training initiatives comparable to those later run by Erasmus Programme partners like Universität Wien.

Participating countries and budget

Participants comprised Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, United Kingdom, and associated countries and territories that maintained links akin to later agreements with Norway and Switzerland. The financial envelope, denominated in French francs and managed through budget lines parallel to subsequent allocations by the European Investment Bank, amounted to approximately ₣2.5 billion, distributed among national authorities, industrial contributors such as British Petroleum and academic beneficiaries including University of Oxford.

Major projects and initiatives

Major initiatives supported pilot programmes in microelectronics involving collaborators like STMicroelectronics and research networks that later influenced projects at Siemens AG and Nokia. Projects in telecommunications drew on expertise from Alcatel-Lucent and research institutes such as Fraunhofer Society, while materials research connected to consortia including ArcelorMittal precursor entities and university groups at Imperial College London. Energy demonstration projects paralleled work by Shell plc and agencies like the IRENA precursor discussions. Collaborative initiatives featured cross-border partnerships similar to those later formalised in EUREKA clusters and helped seed programmes administered through the European Commission's Directorate-General.

Implementation and management

Implementation relied on grant agreements negotiated between the European Commission and consortia consisting of industrial firms, academic centres, and research institutes. Management mechanisms mirrored administrative practices used by the European Court of Auditors for oversight and coordination procedures akin to those in subsequent FP4 cycles. Project evaluation drew on peer review panels composed of experts affiliated with entities such as the Royal Society, Académie des sciences, and national research councils including the German Research Foundation.

Results and impact

Outcomes included strengthened networks across institutions like University of Manchester and Universidad Complutense de Madrid, transfer of technologies to firms such as Motorola successors, and contributions to standards referenced by CEN and ETSI. The programme influenced later instruments such as the FP3 and the institution-building that culminated in the European Research Area. Capacity building benefitted laboratories including Max Planck Society institutes and promoted mobility patterns resembling those later formalised by the Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions.

Criticism and controversies

Critiques arose from national commentators and political actors including representatives in the European Parliament and trade federations sympathetic to unions like European Trade Union Confederation, who argued that distribution concentrated benefits among larger firms such as Siemens AG and Philips and prominent universities like University of Cambridge and Université Pierre et Marie Curie. Debates mirrored tensions visible in discussions at the Bologna Process and criticisms articulated by think tanks such as Bruegel predecessors. Administrative controversies involved audit findings comparable to later reports by the European Court of Auditors and disputes over intellectual property allocation between industrial partners and academic institutions such as ETH Zurich.

Category:European Union research programmes