EuropaBio Archives - European Industrial Pharmacists Group (EIPG)

The EU Parliament voted its position on the Unitary SPC


by Giuliana Miglierini The intersecting pathways of revision of the pharmaceutical and intellectual property legislations recently marked the adoption of the EU Parliament’s position on the new unitary Supplementary Protection Certificate (SPC) system, parallel to the recast of the current Read more

Reform of pharma legislation: the debate on regulatory data protection


by Giuliana Miglierini As the definition of the final contents of many new pieces of the overall revision of the pharmaceutical legislation is approaching, many voices commented the possible impact the new scheme for regulatory data protection (RDP) may have Read more

Environmental sustainability: the EIPG perspective


Piero Iamartino Although the impact of medicines on the environment has been highlighted since the 70s of the last century with the emergence of the first reports of pollution in surface waters, it is only since the beginning of the Read more

EU’s Industrial Forum, the future of advanced manufacturing technologies

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

by Giuliana Miglierini

The expert group “Industrial Forum” is a multistakeholder body created by the European Commission to support the implementation of the Industrial Strategy launched in March 2020 and its following update of May 2021. Its members include Member States authorities, NGOs, industrial representations, research institutions and social partners representing different industrial ecosystems.

Its recently published report is the result of the structured dialogue among members on how to accelerate the deployment of advanced manufacturing technologies (AMTs) across the European industry. Among members which participated in the drafting of the document is also EuropaBio on behalf of the biomanufacturing industry.

Europe is leader in advanced manufacturing

Advanced manufacturing is based on the integration and convergence of the most advanced industrial technologies, i.e. automation, robotics, artificial intelligence and digitally connected solutions. New processes, new products as well as new business models based on this new approach are deemed to represent a fundamental competitive factor in the next few years.

Europe is currently well position in the ranking on “future of production” readiness, with 18 out of 25 countries considered by the World Economic Forum to be leading the change in manufacturing. Despite this, according to the report many efforts are still needed to accelerate the implementation of advanced manufacturing technologies in the EU, so not to be superseded by other fast-evolving competitors.

In order to achieve this challenging goal, the Industrial Forum identified seven different areas of attention, each of which is addressed by specific recommendations based on a SWOT analysis.

The seven areas of recommendation

The transition to new manufacturing models should, first of all, meet the EU sustainability goals established by the European Green Deal: the “net-zero industry” plan for renewables and industrial efficiency technologies is confirmed as a priority action, together with the expansion of the use of REPowerEU. The Commission is working on new energy savings directives, which should be timely implemented. Circularity of manufacturing processes and products is another main goal of EU’s industrial policies, to be supported by a set of new fit-for-purpose rules. A more rapid uptake of advanced manufacturing technologies should also be supported by both the availability of specific public procurement guidance and a targeted communication of the environmental benefits of European clean technologies.

The second area of action addresses how to improve access to capital, a key factor in ensuring the timely implementation of advanced manufacturing technologies. This may include a better use of public investment, as well as a cautious application of state aid instruments specifically targeted at later stages in the innovation and deployment process. The potential of these new technologies for sustainability should also be recognised within the upcoming EU Taxonomy de-legated acts.

The resilience of supply chains could be tackled by the rapid implementation of AMTs. In order to achieve this goal, the Industrial Forum highlighted the need for workable and proportionate rules on Due Diligence. No less important is the negotiation and activation of new Free Trade Agreements with third countries (such as the EU-Mercosur FTA). A critical area refers to the improvement of EU semiconductor capacity. According to the report, incentives and funding aimed to increase the supply chain resilience should be exempt from directing specific outcomes. The European institutions should also better support the local and regional industrial supply chains. Secure access to critical raw materials should be pursued by leveraging the trade policy.

The building of an EU Single Market is a main goal of the European Commission, also in the pharmaceutical field. Its freedoms should be safeguarded by narrowing down the scope of the Single Market Emergency Instrument, while promoting mitigation measures for advanced manufacturing. The Industrial Forum also recommends the availability of a single platform to provide companies with all the needed information to expand and/or export. Furthermore, a Single Market test should be included in the impact assessments of national laws to minimise the occurrence of gold-plating phenomena. New standards for AMTs would also be needed, an area which according to the Industrial Forum should conjugate an enhanced flexibility in standardisation requests and timely delivery in standard setting. Digital product standardisation should also be promoted, and adhesion to the New Legislative Framework should be ensured.

Data is a fundamental asset of the new economy. Recommendations in this area include supporting existing initiatives to create a strong European manufacturing data space, as well as ad-dressing the protection of both personal data and intellectual property rights and trade secrets. As artificial intelligence (AI) will assume an increasingly relevant role in future advanced manufacturing processes, the Forum recommends the development of clear, focused criteria on high-risk AI, while avoiding unnecessary regulation of industrial AI.

The availability of data should be pursued through the identification of a method for data collection in the advanced manufacturing category. It would also be important to generate trusted data sets at the European level for advanced manufacturing deployment, global competitive position, and economic / environmental / societal gains.

Many new skills will be needed in the next few years to handle the expansion of AMTs. To this instance, the Industrial Forum highlighted the importance to promote the harmonisation of Vocational Education and Training (VET) practices and qualification systems and to encourage women and girls to study STEM subjects and working in manufacturing. Other recommendations re-fer to the possibility of developing a Pact for Skills partnership and the proposal of a Blueprint Alliance for Advanced Manufacturing. A better entrepreneurial culture in Europe should also be promoted, as well as capitalisation on European creative industries.

Examples of biomanufacturing

Weaknesses to biomanufacturing identified by the Industrial Forum include the fact that it is still an emerging production process compared to chemical manufacturing. The report also mentions existing regulatory barriers, mainly linked to a process rather than product approvals pathway. Furthermore, significant investments in biomanufacturing are primarily located outside Europe. Possible risks identified by the report also refer to biomanufacturing being excluded or overlooked in key policymaking e.g. taxonomy supporting biomanufacture and sustainable financing.

The report includes two examples of AMTs linked to the health and agrifood sector. Chimeric antigen receptor T cells (CAR-T) represent one of the main areas of innovation in cancer treatment over the past two decades, in which the patient’s immune cells are engineered to produce the final immunotherapy. Many pharmaceutical companies are building specialised manufacturing facilities for CAR-T therapies within Europe, a biomanufacturing process which is highly complex and patient-specific, and requires long term investments, skills development, and integration into the European Union industrial base.

Biomanufacturing may also be applied to the production of vitamin B2 (riboflavin), that multi-step chemical synthesis is complex, requires hazardous agents and has low yields (~60%). Biotechnologies allow for the one-step production of vitamin B2, starting from vegetables as carbon sources and using a genetically modified bacterium (Bacillus subtilis) or fungus (Ashbya gossypii).


The EU Commission proposal of the new pharmaceutical legislation

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

By Giuliana Miglierini

After a five-months delay, the European Commission has announced on 26 April 2023 its proposal for the revision of the European pharmaceutical legislation. The package is comprehensive of a Directive governing authorisations and other regulatory procedures, and a Regulation focused on central authorisation procedures. A Council Recommendation on antimicrobial resistance is also included. The entire reform package shall now undergo the scrutiny of both the European Parliament and Council in order to gain final approval and adoption.

In this first article, we will resume the main features of this highly complex reform, leaving to following posts a more detailed discussion of the single lines of intervention.

The experienced delays acknowledge of the many difficulties encountered by the Commission in reaching a balance between forces representing different perspectives within the pharmaceutical sector. Among the main areas of debate was the exclusivity protection: an issue not yet re-solved, judging from the first reactions from industrial associations, and that should be addressed during the incoming negotiations at the EU Parliament and Council.

A single market for medicines

Central to the entire reform package is the creation of a single European market for medicines, aimed to facilitate the fair and rapid access to patients of all member states. Regulatory procedures for approval of generic and biosimilar medicines should be simplified. Patients are also expected to benefit from more innovative medicines, thanks to a wide array of incentives, and from the repurposing of products already on the market.

Patient centricity should also address rare diseases and new therapeutic options for paediatric patients, including the creation of a EU network of representatives of patients associations, academics, developers and investigators. Patient representatives should be appointed to the EMA Committees, and thus involved in the approval of new medicines. A more extensive use of electronic Product Information is expected to facilitate access to updated information, while reducing costs for manufacturers.

A greater transparency on public funding for R&D should better support price negotiations with national authorities, so to make medicines more affordable to patients.

The long lasting issue of medicines shortages should be tackled from different perspectives. Pharmaceutical companies should be responsible for the emission of earlier warnings on shortages and withdrawals, and for the establishment of prevention plans. European authorities should create a list of critical medicines, to be used to identify supply chain vulnerabilities and improve security of supply. National and central competent authorities are called to a better monitoring of shortages, while EMA should play a stronger guiding role on security of supply.

The One Health approach should inspire actions to improve the environmental sustainability of medicines. From this perspective, the proposed reform includes a strengthened environmental risk assessment for all medicines, including those already on the market. Actions to improve environmentally friendly production technologies and to reduce the release of drugs into the environment are also considered.

Actions supporting innovation

The reform package completely redesigns the duration of regulatory protection, reducing the standard length to 8 years (6 years of data protection + 2 years of market protection), but offering a wide range of incentives to reach a cumulative maximum of up to 12 years of protection. The true novelty is the 2-year incentive for companies launching a new product in all EU markets at the same time. Other incentives are targeted to unmet medical needs (6 months), comparative clinical trials (6 months), and for a new indication to treat another disease (1 year).

The standard market exclusivity should reach 9 years for medicines for rare diseases. In this case too, a wide range of incentives may extend protection to up to 13 years.

The Transferable data exclusivity voucher is the tool identified to support the development of new antimicrobial medicines: the voucher would be transferred to another of the company’s products, extending its protection by 1 year. The Commission plans to issue no more than 10 vouchers over a 15 year period, under strict conditions, so to limit the impact of the measure on healthcare systems. Reshoring of pharmaceutical productions and EU’s strategic autonomy are not included in the reform. A number of other actions are ongoing to support specific lines of intervention, i.e. the EU FAB flexible manufacturing network of vaccines producers, HERA’s Joint Industrial Cooperation Forum on vulnerabilities along the supply chain, and the Important Project of Common European Interest on Health to allocate state aid to support for innovative EU projects.

A more flexible regulatory framework

A higher regulatory flexibility should support fast approval of medicines. Regulatory assessment for centralised procedures should shorten to 180 days (from the current 210); the time should be reduced further to 150 days for products needed for health emergencies.

Simplification of procedures will include full electronic submission of applications. Rolling re-views and temporary emergency marketing authorisations at the EU level for public health emergencies will fully enter the set of available procedures. Simplification should also include the abolishing of the marketing authorisation renewal in most cases.

A reform of EMA’s Committees is also envisaged: only the Committee for Human medicinal pro-ducts (CHMP) and the Safety Committee (PRAC) should continue to exist, while the orphan, paediatric and ATMP committees would be abolished.

Generic and biosimilar medicines shall also benefit from simpler rules for approval, while regulatory sandboxes are the tool to support testing of particularly new and innovative therapies. These may also benefit of additional early scientific advice and regulatory support by EMA, particularly for unmet needs. Dedicated pathways are also planned to support repurposing, especially for SMEs and not-for-profit organisations.

Clinical development may be improved thanks to a wider use of adaptive clinical trials, real world evidence and health data. The reform is also expected to make easier the interaction with other relevant healthcare frameworks, e.g. for medical devices and health technology assessment.

The first comments from interested parties

A very negative opinion on the proposed reform has been issued by the European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industrial Associations (EFPIA), representing the innovator industry.

Unfortunately, today’s proposal manages to undermine research and development in Europe while failing to address access to medicines for patients”, said EFPIA’s Director General Nathalie Moll. The main point of criticism is the 2-year incentive for the contemporary launch of a new medicine in all 27 member states, that for EFPIA would represent an impossible target for companies. According to President Hubertus von Baumbach, “the ‘net’ impact of policies set out across these proposals, in their current form, puts European competitiveness at risk: overall, it weakens the attractiveness for investment in innovation and hampers European science, research and development”. A comprehensive competitiveness checks on the impact of the revised pharmaceutical legislation is EFPIA’s request.

The Association also published a series of reports supporting its vision on the availability of new medicines throughout Europe, as its first action to stimulate the debate in view of the assessment of the proposal by the EU Council and Parliament.

We strongly support the proposal’s intention to stop the well documented patent games manship and evergreening and the adaptation of incentives to necessary equity of access across the EU. Moreover, there should not be an accumulation of regulatory incentives that would extend the regulatory data protection period beyond the existing system (8 years) which is already the longest in the world. Regarding AMR, the Commission proposal for a reserve fund is the correct alternative to transferable vouchers and most efficient policy to protect against future risks”, wrote in a note Medicines for Europe, representing the generic, biosimilar and value added medicines industry. “The central role of the off-patent medicines industry for the patient is clearly reflected in the intentions of the draft legislation. We are still lacking an industrial strategy to strengthen the European off- patent sector and improve open strategic autonomy in health”, said Medicines for Europe President Elisabeth Stampa.

EuropaBio, on behalf of the biotech sector, welcomed the provisions improving the EU’s regulatory framework and promoting novel technologies. In this case too, the main concern is the proposed new set of incentives, that according to EuropaBio may undermine the predictability and stability of the European landscape for innovation. “It is essential that EU policies meaningfully improve patient access to medicines across the EU without undermining the EU’s attractiveness for life science investments”, said EuropaBio Healthcare Public Affairs Director Vlad Olteanu.

AESGP supports the revision of the EU pharmaceutical legislation in principle. While we welcome the regulatory simplifications introduced by the revision, we are voicing some concerns on behalf of non-prescription medicines manufacturers that may have unintended negative consequences”, said Jurate Svarcaite, AESGP Director General. The Association resumed its worries in a statement published in its site.

These include the proposed two new prescription criteria for antimicrobial products and medicines containing an active substance which may have an environmental impact. As for incentives, according to AESGP a longer data exclusivity period (3 years instead of 1) should be considered in cases where new, pivotal evidence is generated, for switching from prescription to non-prescription status. Other points of concern refer to how environmental risks for medicines are to be assessed. “Decisions to minimise the environmental impact should always lead to proportional risk mitigation measures and never interfere with clinical priorities and benefit/ risk assessments that ensure EU citizens get access to the healthcare products they need”, wrote AESGP.

Improvement to the Commission’s proposal would also be needed with regard to the adoption of electronic Product Information, where a phased and harmonised approach to digitalisation is suggested. A better definition of real-world evidence/data would also be needed. As for shortages, mitigation measures should be proportionate and aimed at the critical medicines that do not have alternatives and have concentrated supply chains. AESGP supports the extension of the proposed approach to Risk Management Plans exemption also to medicinal products of well-established use, as for generics and biosimilars.

We appreciate the proposals aimed at streamlining and digitalising regulatory procedures, yet we are concerned that other provisions will undermine R&D, innovation, and EU competitiveness. These will be especially detrimental to the small and mid-sized innovative companies that Eucope represents. The proposal introduces more risk and unpredictability into the system while reducing incentives for innovation and investment, which will negatively impact patient access”, wrote the association in its comments to the proposal of reform.

The Commission’s revision includes troubling proposals, such as the introduction of (High) Unmet Medical Need, which risk reducing the EU’s global competitiveness in life sciences, thereby limiting the development and availability of innovative therapies”, said Eucope Secretary General Alexander Natz.


The new European Innovation Agenda

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

by Giuliana Miglierini

A new piece of legislation adds to the framework supporting the new paradigms set forth by the European Commission: the European Innovation Agenda (EIA) aims to position the EU as a global leading player in innovation, especially in the field of deep techs. These are usually referred to as a combination of physical, biological and digital emerging technologies targeted to develop new, transformative solutions in all areas of economy and society.

Breakthrough R&D and large capital investment are the identified tools to support their development. “We need to boost our innovation ecosystems to develop human-centered technologies. This new Innovation Agenda builds on the significant work done already on innovation in the last years and will help us accelerate our digital and green transition. The Agenda is rooted in the digital, physical and biological spheres and will enable us tackle better burning concerns, such as breaking the dependence from fossil fuels or securing our food supply in a sustainable way.”, said Margrethe Vestager, Executive Vice-President for a Europe fit for the Digital Age.

The five areas of intervention

The European Innovation Agenda is divided in five different flagship areas, for a total of 25 actions.

Startups and scale-up companies will be the central focus of the Agenda and the target of investments by both private capital and institutional investors. Simplified listing rules are planned to support their scaling. The debt-equity bias reduction allowance on corporate income tax would also benefit of a later stage venture capital financing, with expansion of the European scale-up action for the risk capital mechanism under InvestEU. An innovation gender and diversity index and the EIT Women2Invest Programme are other planned actions in the area.

Relevant investments are envisaged to attract and train at least 1 million talents in the field of deep tech and to support women entrepreneurship. Among the planned activities are an innovation intern scheme for startups and scale-ups, and an EU talent pool to help young innovative companies to attract extra-EU specialists. A Women entrepreneurship and leadership scheme and the establishment of a best practice exchange on startup employees’ stock options are also planned. Other initiatives shall support the promotion of an entrepreneurial and innovation culture; these actions will include support to education and innovation practice communities, Erasmus+ alliances for innovation, and a Digital Europe call to train future experts.

Under the regulatory perspective, regulatory sandboxes and experimentation spaces coupled to public procurement are expected to facilitate the development of new ideas. Among the possible experimental approaches mentioned by the EIA there are open innovation test beds in renewable hydrogen, living labs and innovation procurement. This last sector may see the establishment of an Innovation Procurement Specialist Advisory Service.

Guidance will be provided to policy makers on regulatory sandboxes. State aid rules shall also be revised to better support the construction of testing and experimentation facilities, namely in the field of AI innovation.

Interconnections of the different players and the creation of a network of European Innovation Ecosystems will be pursued through “regional innovation valleys”. Interregional innovation projects should benefit of a total budget of €10 billion, that shall also be used to support member states’ efforts towards the integrated use of cohesion policy and Horizon Europe instruments. Among the planned actions is the doubling of the number of Hydrogen valleys in the EU, the creation of a Innospace (a one stop shop for innovation) and the establishment of the EIC ScaleUp 100 index, reflecting the hundred deep tech startups with the potential to scale up as global leaders or potential unicorn.

Finally, the transparency of the overall process will be pursued using clearer terminology, indicators and data sets to improve the policy framework, and a better policy support to member states. This shall allow for a better comparability of data sets and the use of shared definitions to inform and coordinate policies at all levels, through the European Innovation Council Forum.

The new European Innovation Agenda will complement existing tools to support R&D and innovation, such as Horizon Europe’s actions targeted to startups, scaleups and small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), the funding by the European Innovation Council (EIC) (we wrote about this here) and the new Knowledge and Innovation Communities (KICs) created by the European Institute of Innovation and Technology (EIT).

Comments from the stakeholders

For more than a year we have consulted the stakeholders, such as innovation ecosystem leaders, startups, unicorns, women founders, women working in the capital venture, universities, and businesses. Together, we will make Europe the global powerhouse for deep-tech innovations and startups”, said Mariya Gabriel, Commissioner for Innovation, Research, Culture, Education and Youth.

Among contributors to the debate was EuropaBio, that published its response to the Commission’s proposal.

The requests of the association representing the biotechnology industry to remove regulatory barriers through the establishment of regulatory sandboxes has been recognised in the EIA, as well as the need to invest in scientific and industrial excellence and bridge the innovation gap between member states. Other key issues highlighted by EuropaBio included the need to review the GMO legislation to overcome the process-based approach that often results in unequal regulatory treatment for similar products with equivalent risk profiles, together with improved policies for rewarding innovation and the need to build digital literacy skills.

The Irish Pharmaceutical Healthcare Association also commented the Commission’s proposal. According to the post signed by Bernard Mallee, IPHA’s Director of Communications and Advocacy, despite the effort of the Commission to boost innovation and fill the gap with US and China in the development of breakthrough treatments, mixed results may be expected. Incentives in areas of unmet medical need and the fight against antimicrobial resistance are identified as key issues. The suggested solution is a better underlying commercial model targeted to invest in the development of new antibiotics, and the importance of health data in driving medical research and managing healthcare systems. Improved iterative scientific dialogue and dynamic regulatory assessment based on real-world data and innovative trial designs are other point of concern for IPHA. Harmonisation of the EU Special Protection Certificate framework was also suggested, while the coordination of compulsory licensing in emergency situations in Europe was judged at risk of de-incentivise innovation. IPHA also supports the High-Level Forum on Better Access to Health Innovation initiative launched by EFPIA.

Positive comments to the new European Innovation Agenda also came from the European Startup Network (representative of 38 national startups associations) and the European Regions Research and Innovation Network (ERRIN) (see more on ScienceBusiness).

The revision of the pharmaceutical legislation is also central to the agenda of the Czech EU Presidency for the second half of 2022. Again, the goal is to close the gap with the competitor countries and speed up the approval of new treatments. According to Euractiv, it takes on average 150 days longer to get an innovative medicine approved in Europe than in the US. Just 22% of innovative medicines are being developed in the EU, vs 48% of the US (data EFPIA).


The new vision for the European research landscape

, , , , , , , , , , , , ,

by Giuliana Miglierini

The new European framework for research and innovation, Horizon Europe (HE, 2021-2027), is now operative. A great deal of work has been accomplished in the recent months in order to define the possibility for third countries to participate to the new projects that will be activated. The List of Participating Countries in Horizon Europe was published by the European Commission at mid-June; it includes eighteen third countries associated to the framework programme, according to the provisions set forth by Regulation 2021/6951.

Eighteen third countries associated to Horizon Europe
The list also includes the United Kingdom, which became a third country after the Brexit, but with the exception of its participation to the EIC Fund (which is part of the EIC Accelerator that provides investment through equity or other repayable form).
The status of associated country makes its legal entities entitled to participate to HE’s projects under equivalent conditions as legal entities from the EU member states, unless specific limitations or conditions are specified in the work programme and/or call/topic text. All the sixteen non-EU countries associated to Horizon 2020 have expressed interest to continue the collaboration with the EU’s researchers. Transitional arrangements are in place to govern their participation to HE while waiting for the definitive closure of the negotiations.
Israel, Iceland and Norway are other components of this list, together with the majority of East European countries, Turkey, Morocco and Tunisia. Among not associated countries, Liechtenstein openly expressed its intention not to become an associated country. Further negotiations can lead to the expansion of the list.
Non-associated countries and international organisations can participate to most Horizon Europe’s calls, unless specific limitations or conditions apply; particularly interesting from this point of view are topics of research specifically directed to improve international cooperation.
Participants from not associated countries are not automatically eligible for funding, thus have to participate to the research activities at their own cost. Some exceptional circumstances allow them to access funding, i.e. in the case of outstanding competence/expertise, or if access to particular research infrastructures, data or geographical environment is needed. Automatic funding is available to a selected list of low- to middle-income countries from Africa, Asia, South America and Oceania.

The case of Switzerland
Switzerland is currently excluded from the pool of associated countries to Horizon Europe.
This is the result of the decision of the Swiss Federal Council occurred at the end of May to stop the seven years-long negotiations with the EU Commission (see more on Science Business).
Significantly, scientific research and the status of associated country within HE was not part of this negotiation, that was focused instead on bilateral agreements for the free movement of persons and mutual recognition of industry standards, agricultural products, air transport and land transport, as reported by Science Business.
The exclusion of Switzerland immediately caused a vivid debate among European scientists, worried for the possible consequences of the inability of their Swiss colleagues to take part to HE’s projects. An Open Letter signed by many different European Science,Technology & Innovation (STI) Councils and Advisory Bodies and other Science organisations (among which Science Europe and Cesaer) urges for the full association of Switzerland with Horizon Europe.
The signatories of this letter would like to underline the importance of continuing the long established and mutually beneficial cooperation between the EU and Switzerland in the domain of research and innovation”, states the letter. Many are the past contributions from the Helvetic country to the success of European research, starting with the hosting of the European Organisation for Nuclear Research (CERN) up to the foundation of the European Space Agency. “Downgrading Switzerland to a third country would severely limit its expertise being brought into Horizon Europe projects tackling today’s and tomorrow’s global challenges. We are convinced that this would lead to a lose-lose situation, putting successful cooperation in strategic areas at risk and ultimately weaken the ERA as a whole”, write the scientific organisations.

The situation with respect to China, the US and Canada
The “open strategic autonomy” is the new paradigm of action the von der Leyen Commission shall apply also in the field of research and innovation. According to Science Business, this approach will represent the basis for the negotiations with countries like China, that might require a higher level of attention with respect to the need of providing adequate protection for the intellectual property developed by European scientists.
Preliminary discussions to solve legal issues that prevented the participation of US universities to EU research projects in the past years are also undergoing. In the meantime, the high level EUUS Trade and Technology Council (TTC) was launched by US president Joe Biden and EU Commission president Ursula von der Leyen during the US-EU Summit in Brussels on June 15, 2021.
The TTC will meet periodically at the political level to coordinate approaches to key global trade, economic, and technology issues and to deepen transatlantic trade and economic relations commitment to strengthen our technological and industrial leadership and expand bilateral trade and investment. It also gives us tools to address threats such as unfair competition and the misuse of new technologies. This is a top priority for the EU, and we warmly welcome the fact that it is now also at the top of the transatlantic trade agenda”, said Valdis Dombrovskis, European Commission Executive Vice-President and EU Trade Commissioner.
The TTC will operate through several working groups, responsible to translate the political decisions into deliverables, coordinate the technical work and report to the political level. Among the first topics for its action is cooperation in the field of technology standards and secure supply chains.
Preliminary negotiations took place also with Canada in the course of the European Union-Canada summit, in June (See more here). Specific points in the field of health mentioned in the final joint statement include the launch of a new Canada-EU dialogue on health under the Strategic Partnership Agreement to improve health cooperation in multilateral contexts, and an enhanced bilateral cooperation under Horizon Europe. This last action should see some exploratory discussions towards a possible association of Canada to the framework programme, particularly with respect to the green and digital transitions and AI and quantum cooperation.

A new Strategy for Science Europe
Science Europe, the organisation representing major national research performing organisations (RPOs) and research funding organisations (RFOs) in Europe, has published its new Strategy 2021-2026 and the related Action Plan.
The central vision of the news Strategy is that “for a European Research Area with optimal conditions, to support robust education, research and innovation systems”. This goal will be pursued by defining the long-term perspectives for European research and selecting the best-practice approaches. Scientific knowledge as a common good, research as a public service, freedom of scientific inquiry, responsibility of all actors in ensuring the highest possible standards of quality, ethics, integrity, inclusivity, and openness in the conduct and management of research are just some of the values that have inspired the Strategy.
Three priorities will guide members organisations, starting from the role RPOs and RFOs can play in shaping future developments of the European research policy. Open science will continue to represent the paradigm of choice in order to ensure sustainability of the R&I system. A possible evolution of the current framework may result in the proposed European Framework Programmes for Research and Innovation. Science Europe will support its members in promoting investment in R&I and in closing the performance divide between different national R&I systems in Europe. Complementarities shall constitute the basis of bilateral and multilateral collaboration between member organisations, as well as of cross-border collaborations at a global level.
The diffusion of a solid, quality-driven research culture is a fundamental requirement for its success. Science Europe plans to play a central role with other European institutions in jointly define and implement the positive culture shift needed to create sustainable research ecosystems. This goal will take advantage of the different approaches and values that are used by researchers from different EU countries, taking also into consideration the global challenges and societal expectations and the degree of self-organisation of the European R&I system. Incentives and rewards are foreseen as a way to improve the sustainable development of research systems, together with a better coherence between policy areas.
According to Science Europe, the European research framework is called to an effort to develop new, long-term solutions for the current challenges that affects society. Interdependencies between curiosity-driven and challenge-oriented approaches should be addressed in order to boost this target, together with the support to Open Science models. A stronger engagement between researchers, policy makers and society, and improved support to trans-disciplinary research are key objectives set forth by Science Europe’s Strategy.

A Strategic Agenda from five industrial associations
From the industrial point of view, the activation of the new Horizon Europe research framework will correspond to the end of the Innovative Medicines Initiative (IMI), that characterised the public-private partnerships for research in the pharmaceutical and life sciences sectors in the past decade.
A new framework is expected to take its place, the proposed Innovative Health Initiative (IHI), which should be activated in the context of Horizon Europe. While the European Commission is still working to define the legislation governing the new partnerships, a Strategic Agenda for Research & Innovation in Healthcare has been released by five European industry associations representing the pharmaceutical, biotech and medical technologies industries (COCIR, EFPIA, MedTech Europe, EuropaBio and Vaccines Europe).The Agenda has been jointly drafted by the prospective IHI Joint Undertaking member industry associations and the European Commission services (based on the results of a public consultation ran in 2019) and it should represent the basis for the final, formal adoption of the new IHI framework after the partnership legislation has been adopted and the partnership is operational. A new tool is planned within Horizon Europe to run the IHI, the institutionalised Public-Private Partnerships, which are expected to help de-risking the pre-competitive public-private collaboration.
The vision illustrated by the document reflects the new models of cross-sectorial integration of technologies, know-how, products, services and workflows in order to build true new peoplecentred healthcare systems. The development of new solutions for the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of diseases should aim to sustain the good health of EU citizens, and decrease the disease burden for patients, care givers and healthcare professionals.
The new European ecosystem for R&I should aim, according to the document, to facilitate translation of scientific knowledge into innovation, so to respond to the strategic unmet public health needs in a cost-effective way.
Five specific objectives to be achieved by 2030 are envisaged by the Strategy, from a better understanding of the determinants of health and priority disease areas to the integration of fragmented health R&I efforts, up to the development of tools, data, platforms, technologies and processes for improved prediction, prevention, interception, diagnosis, treatment and management of diseases. Projects will be also targeted to demonstrate the feasibility of peoplecentred, integrated healthcare solutions. Digitalisation and data exchange will be central activities to achieve this goal, and will also support the development of new and improved methodologies and models for the comprehensive assessment of the added value of integrated healthcare innovations.
Examples of the activities that may be part of the new IHI projects are the discovery, development and testing of new molecules, and the study of their mechanisms of action; the development and testing of new processes and technologies, and new methodologies for the assessment of safety, health outcomes or for health-economic evaluation. Development may be run up to the pre-standardisation activities or pilots/proofs of feasibility scale, including in-silico trials. Contributions to the development of regulatory science are also an expected outcome. The pharmaceutical and medical technology sectors will be engaged in multi-sectorial activities, moving from product- and pathology-centric goals to patient-centric development. Priorities of research shall be set forth by early engagement with public sector stakeholders, through the establishment of a new Innovation Panel.