The following is an adaptation of an article written by Anna Taraczközi, a research fellow at the Europe Strategy Institute of the University of Public Service, originally published on the Five Minutes Europe blog of Ludovika.hu.
An old but pressing question has once again come to the fore in the European Union’s research and innovation policy: how can Europe’s global competitiveness be maintained without further widening the innovation gap between Member States?
The so-called widening countries—that is, those Member States whose research and innovation performance lags behind the EU average—have once again become the focus of debate in the preparations for the new Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) and the next Framework Programme for Research and Innovation (FP10). According to an article published by Science|Business on 23 October, Member States are divided on whether to apply geographical balancing mechanisms to the newly proposed European Competitiveness Fund (ECF) to ensure that funds do not flow solely to the most advanced research centres. The issue goes beyond financial distribution: Europe’s future cohesion and strategic sovereignty may also depend on it.
The term ‘widening’ became an institutionalized political category in the early 2010s, although the roots of the problem go back much further to the EU’s eastern enlargement in 2004 and 2007. The ‘Widening Participation and Spreading Excellence’ sub-programme appeared in Horizon 2020 and then in Horizon Europe with the aim of reducing differences in research and development performance within the EU.
The widening countries—Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Greece, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia—are trying to catch up with targeted support, for example, through the Twinning, Teaming, and ERA Chairs programmes. However, these instruments have so far only partially achieved their objectives: in the Horizon 2020 programme, the widening countries received barely 5 per cent of the total funding, which clearly shows that research excellence and geographical balance remain sensitive issues.
‘Widening countries received barely 5 per cent of the total funding, which clearly shows that research excellence and geographical balance remain sensitive issues’
It was in this context that the idea of the European Competitiveness Fund was born, first proposed by the European Commission in July 2024. The official legislative proposal was submitted on 17 July 2025. The ECF aims to strengthen the EU’s industrial and technological competitiveness by offering a single, faster, and less bureaucratic funding instrument to support strategic sectors such as artificial intelligence, clean technologies, biotechnology, and space and defence. According to the Commission, previous programmes were fragmented, which slowed down the commercialization of research results. To counteract this, the ECF would introduce a ‘one-stop shop’ system that would follow developments from research to market entry, in close cooperation with Horizon Europe and the future FP10 programme.
According to the proposal on the size and structure of the fund, the total budget of the ECF could be around €400 billion for the 2028–2034 multiannual financial cycle, of which €68 billion would be earmarked for research and innovation, closely linked to the Horizon programme. Although the Commission emphasizes that the ECF will not directly finance research projects—that will remain the responsibility of Horizon—, the new fund would still have a decisive impact on the innovation landscape by focusing support on commercialization and industrial transfer.
The proposal is currently being negotiated between the European Parliament and the Council. Industry players and business associations welcome the idea, saying that it will finally create a tool to help Europe catch up with the US and China in strategic technologies. At the same time, the research community and several Member States have expressed concern that the ECF will push EU innovation policy too far in the direction of industry and push basic research into the background. According to an October report by Science|Business, Central and Eastern European Member States in particular are demanding that geographical considerations also be taken into account in the ECF, otherwise funds will once again go to already developed research centres, and the widening objectives will lose credibility.
‘It will finally create a tool to help Europe catch up with the US and China in strategic technologies’
The debate, therefore, centres on the extent to which competitiveness and convergence can be reconciled. Northern and western Member States emphasize that the EU must support those regions where resources generate the greatest added value; otherwise, Europe will fall behind in the global technology race. Southern and eastern countries, on the other hand, fear that without geographical balance, the ECF will widen the research gap rather than narrow it.
The debate surrounding the European Competitiveness Fund thus reflects the dilemma facing the widening countries: how to accelerate excellence while maintaining European cohesion. Although the Commission’s aim is for the new fund to be the flagship for strengthening European industry, the division among Member States clearly shows that competitiveness is now not just an economic issue, but also a political one. The coming months will decide whether the ECF will mark the beginning of a new era in European innovation financing, or it will be just another attempt that further deepens the old divisions within the EU.
Read more:
Click here to read the original article.