H2020-SC5-2016-TwoStage: informazioni importanti dalla Commissione europea per chi ha passato la prima fase

La Commissione ha pubblicato sul Participant Portal di Horizon 2020 alcune importanti considerazioni utili a chi deve presentare la fase 2 dei topic SC5-01-2016-2017, SC5-14-2016-2017 e SC5-21-2016-2017. Ecco il testo della Commissione europea:

"For successful first stage applicants, it is important to uphold the principle of equal treatment, and to ensure that all have a chance to benefit from the comments of experts. Therefore, instead of an ESR, this generalised feedback is provided now to all applicants invited to submit a full proposal at the second stage. You are kindly requested to take this feedback into account when preparing your full proposal. At the second stage you have a chance to address or clarify issues that should convince the second stage experts. Some or all of these experts may not be the same as those who reviewed your outline proposal.

Summary of main shortcomings in first stage successful proposals:

Topic SC5-01-2016-2017: Exploiting the added value of climate services

• Some proposals focused more on the technical development rather than on the user-driven demonstration of climate services, as required by the topic
• Attention given to procedures and metrics for measuring and validating the climate services' added value by end users was not always satisfactory, as well as the consideration of key aspects of replicability and marketability of climate services and related IPR issues
• In some cases, only technical/scientific barriers and solutions to the deployment of climate services were addressed whereas the topic entails a more comprehensive approach, including non-technical barriers

Topic SC5-14-2016-2017: Raw materials Innovation actions

• Definition of the specific technological improvements envisaged by the applicants as well as a set of measurable indicators reflecting the way in which the corresponding progress in the state of the art will be achieved were not always clearly provided
• The proposal's impact on unlocking substantial reserves of new or today unexploited resources within the EU as well as the impact on creating added value and new jobs in the raw materials sector was not always described in a satisfactory manner
• Impacts related to improving health and safety performance of operations and improved awareness, acceptance and trust of society were not always adequately explained
• Specific measurable indicators of the expected impacts were often not adequately described

Topic SC5-21-2016-2017: Cultural heritage as a driver for sustainable growth

• The choice of role models and replicator cities were not always duly justified
• Not all relevant disciplines were always integrated in the concept (e.g. SC5-21a-2016 is flagged as a topic for social sciences and humanities)
• The targeted impacts were not always fully clear on how they were to be achieved and monitored