Good for Business, but Also Good for Research? Seven Takeaways From the EU Start-Ups and Scale-Ups Strategy

1)

The link between research and innovation is clear: while the Single Market Strategy released the week before was almost silent on the role of research in Europe’s wider competitiveness, the SU² Ups Strategy is strong on this point. Infograms of the progress of a start-up make it clear that research will precede its establishment. Furthermore, the strength of the European research sector is cited as a particular advantage. Indeed, the press release describes the SU² Strategy as part of the wider ‘Choose Europe’ initiative kicked off with President von der Leyen’s speech about science at the Sorbonne last month. We can only encourage other parts of the Commission beyond DG GROW and DG RTD to be consistent in recognising the connection.

2)

Yet there remain barriers to commercialisation of ideas coming from the public sector: the SU² Strategy and Staff Working Document both highlight difficulties in convincing academics to invest in commercialisation, with pressure to publish first, as well as a lack of financial incentives cited as reasons. Even when patents are filed, they are rarely turned into new businesses. The point will be covered below in more depth, but the Staff Working Document does also note that copyright law creates a barrier by creating a deterrent to engagement in commercial research. The need for a stronger focus on the need for action to simplify research-industry collaboration is clear – not least in the area of copyright.

3)

Access to research infrastructures – including materials – matters: the SU² Strategy highlights in particular plans to allow easier access for companies to major publicly-funded research infrastructures. It explores the value of going beyond simply selling access to private firms – e.g. to high-powered computing – instead encouraging closer relationships. Crucially, in the Staff Working Document, the definition of research infrastructures extends to documentary collections, such as archives for the social sciences. It also underlines that among barriers to access, the complexity and sheer volume of legal frameworks, including intellectual property rights, can create barriers for start-ups and scale-ups. The promised ‘Charter of Access’ to such infrastructures should aim to overcome these.

4)

Data-intensive companies have a particularly significant role: the Staff Working Document highlights in particular the potential of data, especially in supporting the growth of high-value data-intensive start-ups and scale-ups. It also warns that the exponential increase in data availability risks running into poorly aligned regimes for access (such as copyright), thus reducing its potential as an enabler of innovation and growth. Work around thematic data spaces is highlighted as part of the solution here, but don’t focus on the sort of discipline agnostic access needed for many. Moreover, rather surprisingly, the Data Union Strategy (currently open for consultation) is not referenced at all. Indeed, despite the EU’s strong focus on the topic, artificial intelligence gets only one mention in the full text. As we have highlighted elsewhere, a comprehensive approach to enabling access to data through open norms, as well as accelerating open access through measures such as Secondary Publication Rights and Rights Retention is overdue.

5)

The return of the Innovation Principle?: the SU² Strategy calls for an ‘Innovation Stress Test’ to be applied to new laws being passed at the national level. This appears to mirror the concept of the ‘Innovation Principle’ developed in the EU over ten years ago, designed to ensure that new laws avoided shutting down new areas of experimentation and growth unnecessarily. It also strongly links to the simplification agenda, where the Commission is aiming to remove unnecessary barriers preventing the economy from flourishing. Referring back to the first point above, a key weakness in the original version of the Innovation Principle was its focus purely on the private sector, neglecting the role of public sector research in innovation. We have previously strongly argued that any formal version of such as Stress Test should explicitly consider the needs of the research sector, as well as those of business.

6)

A more nuanced approach to intellectual property needed: the SU² Strategy risks falling into the trap of seeing all aspects of intellectual property as having a similar relationship with innovation. This is a common issue in such documents, with the focus of any concrete measures usually being promoting patenting and trademarking. As mentioned above, at least in the Staff Working Document, the more complex impact that copyright has on innovation is made clear, and in particular the harmful effect of discriminating between non-commercial and commercial uses in research. Furthermore, the centrality of information and data to AI should by make clear to all policy makers the importance of ensuring Europe has a copyright regime that maximises access to data – something which is currently not the case.

7)

Could what works for start-ups work for research?: while the topic is not addressed in the SU² Strategy itself (which may be logical, given its focus), many of the ideas in there could provide inspiration for how the EU supports basic research into the future. This is as relevant to situations where publicly-funded researchers are working closely with industry as to those where they are cooperating with colleagues in other countries or in other institutions such as hospitals or NGOs. The importance of ensuring that any Innovation Stress Test also benefits the research sector is already covered above, but Europe would also benefit from a more focused approach in general to identifying challenges to the conduct, sharing and application of research across both private and public sectors of the economy more broadly. Just as it should be possible for companies to draw on a 28^th regime that allows them to work (and work with partners) anywhere in Europe, the same should also apply for scientists and researchers.