FP7-ICT-2013
Pre-Commercial Procurement (PCP)
Lieve Bos
(lieve.bos AT ec.europa.eu)
European Commission
DG CONNECT F2 unit (“Innovation”)
Rationale
RTD expenditure as % of GDP
3,5
3
2,5
2
1,5
1
0,5
0
 Public sector is faced with
important challenges. Often
public sector transformations
require innovative solutions,
and forward looking public
procurement strategies
 However, public procurement of
R&D is underutilised in EU
versus other parts of the world
EU
US
R&D Procurement
Basic +applied R&D funding

Public expenditure in Europe is
higher than in other parts of the
world (47% of EU-25 GDP)

But 20 times less is spent on
preparing the public sector for
future challenges: R&D
procurement in EU (~2,5 Bn€)
versus US (~50Bn€)
Overcoming
the barriers
 Lack of awareness of
how to optimise riskbenefit balance for
procurer and supplier
 Phased approach, separate
procurement of R&D from
procurement of commercial
vollumes of end-solutions, IPR
sharing at market price
 Unclear how within
the legal framework
for R&D procurement
 Commission PCP communication
COM(2007)799 &
SEC(2007)1668
 Fragmentation of
demand
 Cooperation among procurers
(share PCP/PPI experience/cost),
EU support for cross-border
PCPs/PPIs
3
How does it work
 Smart PCP/PPI combination enabling:
– Price/quality products that better fit public sector needs
– Earlier customer feedback for companies developing solutions
– Better take-up/Wider commercialisation of R&D results
–
Price/quality products that better fit public sector needs
–
Earlier customer feedback for companies developing solutions
–
Better take-up/Wider commercialisation of R&D results
Public Procurement of
Innovative Solutions (PPI)
R&D / Pre-commercial Procurement (PCP)
(COM/2007/799 &
SEC/2007/1668)
Phase 0
Curiosity
Driven
Research
Phase 1
Solution design
Phase 2
Prototype
development
Supplier A
Supplier B
Supplier B
Supplier C
Supplier C
Supplier D
Supplier D
Phase 3
Original development
of limited volume
of first test products /
services
Supplier B
Supplier D
Phase 4
Deployment of commercial
end-products
Diffusion of newly developed
products / services
Supplier(s)
A,B,C,D
and/or X
Also normally multiple sourcing
here to keep competition going
… in line with WTO proc. rules, EU Treaty, State aid free
PCP Pre-Commercial Procurement
 When
– Challenge requires R&D to get new solutions developed. Problem
clear, but pros / cons of several potential competing solutions not
compared / validated yet. No commitment to deploy (PPI) yet.
 What
– Public sector buys R&D to steer development of solutions to its
needs, gather knowledge about pros / cons of alternative solutions,
to avoid supplier lock-in later (create competitive supply base)
 How
– Public sector buys R&D from several suppliers in parallel (comparing
alternative solution approaches), in form of competition evaluating
progress after critical milestones (design, prototyping, test phase),
risks & benefits of R&D (e.g. IPRs) shared with suppliers to
maximise incentives for wide commercialisation
Status of PCP implementation
across Europe
Update November 2012 status
Framework identified
Awareness Raising Working on and/or pilots
Exploring possibilities framework in preparation
SILVER
Malta
Latvia Slovenia
Romania
Greece
Cyprus
Bulgaria Estonia
Luxembourg
Slovakia
Czech Republic
Switzerland
Pilots
started
Denmark
V-CON
Iceland
Sweden
Ireland
Lithuania
Finland
Poland
Spain
CHARM
Netherlands
UK
Belgium
Hungary
France
Portugal
Italy
Austria
Germany
SMART@FIRE
Norway
Projects in dotted-line are cross-border EC funded PCPs:
SILVER: EC co-funded PCP pilot started January 2012 (Supporting Independent Living of Elderly through Robotics)
CHARM: EC co-funded PCP pilot started September 2012 (Common Highways Agency Rijkswaterstaat Model)
V-CON: EC co-funded PCP pilot started October 2012 (Virtual Construction of Roads)
SMART@FIRE: EC co-funded PCP pilot started November 2012 (Integrated ICT solutions for Smart Personal Protective
Equipment for Fire Fighters and First Responders)
More Info about national PCP initiatives in Member States: http://cordis.europa.eu/fp7/ict/pcp/msinitiatives_en.html
More info about EU funded cross border PCP projects: http://cordis.europa.eu/fp7/ict/pcp/projects_en.html
Example PCP-like project in
Healthcare
www.nic.nhs.uk
Potential £160m
p.a. saving
Potential £19m p.a. saving
Potential £30m p.a. saving
£4,000 per HCAI avoided
Potential £17m p.a. saving
7
Potential Value to NHS:
 The NIC has supported the development of innovations to improve the quality of the
patient experience and generate significant cost savings to the NHS (£236m).
Value to the economy:
 With the support of the NHS National Innovation Center (NIC), a number of
innovations have been able to attract significant funding (£290m).
PCP example on CO2 emissions
Carbon capture – Norway
Statoil/Gassanova



Regulatory requirement to seriously reduce CO2 emissions by 2016 without negative effects
on health/environment, beyond what market is able to offer
PCP started in 2011, currently comparing solution approaches of 5 vendors, time-to-market
shortened
Follow-up procurement for deployment foreseen for 2014 (open to whole market again)
EC co-financing for
Cross-border PCPs
FP7-ICT-2013
An open call for joint PCPs addressing any area of public interest (CP-CSA for PCP grants)
Objective 11.1, Call 10: Proposals for joint PCPs can relate to for example public sector needs for
new ICT solutions in healthcare, inclusion, e-government, transport, energy efficiency,
environment, security, education etc (€4M: 1 project)
Targeted calls for joint PCPs in specific areas of public interest (CP-CSA for PCP grants)
Objective 5.1.(d), Call 10 - Personalised Health - Active Ageing (€8M)
up to 1 on personalised care for co-morbid patients
up to 2 on mobile ehealth services
Objective 11.3, Call 10 - High quality cloud computing for public sector needs (€10M: 1 project)
Objective 11.2, Call 11 - More efficient, affordable digital preservation (€5M: up to 2 projects)
Objective 8.2, Call 11 - Technology enhanced learning (min €5,5M)
Call deadlines: call 10 (15 Jan 2013), call 11 (16 April 2013)
What does “CP-CSA for PCP” EC financing cover
Preparation proposals
CP-CSA for PCP
P4
P3
Consortia of public
purchasers
P1->P5
EU-Funding
100 % for CSA part: Networking
and Coordination activities
Max 75 % for CP part: Joint
research activities , Joint PCP
tendering (R&D Services)
Product
Idea
Supplier A
Supplier B
Supplier C
Supplier C
Supplier C
Supplier D
Supplier E
Supplier D
Supplier E
Supplier E
Phase 1
Solution
Exploration
Phase 2
Prototyping
Product
Solution
Solution
Idea DesignDesign
Phase 3
Original development of a
limited volume of first
products/services
in the form of a test series
Prototype
Prototype
First TestProducts
Commercial
Tendering
Intermediate
Evaluation
Selectiona
Intermediate
Evaluation
Selection
ONE joint
PCP tender
P2
CP part max 75%
Dissimination PCP
Choice
between
possible
constellations
for joint
procurement
Preparing joint PCP
Management/Coordination joint PCP
CSA part 100%
P1
P5
Public Procurement
for commercial roll-out
CP-CSA for PCP
Supplier
A,B,C,D,E
or X
Phase 4
Commercialisation of products/services
(commercial development)
Commercial
End-Products
Typical Product Innovation Life Cycle
10
CP-CSA for PCP grant
FP7-ICT-2013
 Support for consortia of public purchasers planning joint
cross-border PCP on topics of common European interest
- Bring radical improvements to the quality and efficiency
of public services with breakthrough solutions
Typical duration PCP project 3-4 years, projects WP2013 start 2nd half 2013
-> target solutions to be deployed 2018 at earliest
- Reduce fragmentation public sector demand and create
opportunities for leadership in new markets for industry
 EU contribution (CP-CSA): combination of
– CSA: Reimbursement of eligible costs for preparation, management and
coordination of the joint PCP call for tender (100% funded)
– CP: Reimbursement of max 75% of the eligible costs for the development of the
new ICT solutions procured through the joint PCP (for financing the R&D to
be performed by the bidders selected via the joint PCP)
* CP-CSA = combination of CP and CSA funding within the same EC grant agreement
11
Eligibility criteria
consortia
 Minimum number of participants
– 3 mutually independent public purchasers from 3 different
Member States or FP7 Associated Countries
– Critical mass of public purchasers necessary to trigger wide
implementation of the public service innovation strategies and
solutions that will be specified and/or developed during the PCP
with clear financial commitments for undertaking the joint PCP.
 Public purchasers are
– contracting authorities in the meaning of procurement directives
(2004/18/EC & 2008/17/EC), responsible for the acquisition
strategy of the new ICT solutions that could be developed through
the joint PCP, to obtain the required quality/efficiency
improvements in their public service offering
– Examples: public hospitals / transport operators, ministries (e.g.
for health, welfare, transport, environment, justice, etc), water or
energy utilities, local/regional authorities, police or fire fighters
12
Eligibility criteria
consortia
 Other stakeholders
– e.g. user organisations, regulatory/certification bodies influencing
uptake of solutions, R&I ministries/agencies incentivising national
procurers to undertake PCPs
– Whose participation well justified -> may participate, but…
 Private bodies
– Potential suppliers of solutions sought for by the public bodies ->
not eligible to participate as EC grant beneficiaries (to avoid
conflicts of interest)
– Not potential suppliers of solutions sought for by the public
bodies -> may participate as EC grant beneficiaries (e.g. private
contracting authorities such as private hospitals)
 Universities
– May participate on the buyers side as “public purchasers”
interested in procuring new development of solution xyz
– If “for profit”, may participate on the supply side as
bidders/contractors developing solutions in the PCP
13
Funding rate for CP part
 Private entities that are potential suppliers of solutions for
the PCP in the CP part cannot participate as beneficiaries
 Private entities that are not potential suppliers, but buyers contracting authorities (CAs) under procurement directives can participate as beneficiaries
 Type 1 beneficiaries: CAs eligible for 75% rate in CP part
– Non profit ‘public’ bodies (e.g. local/regional/national authorities
considered contracting authorities under proc. Dir. 2004/18/EC)
– Secondary and higher education establishments and research orgs (in
their capacity as potential buyers, not suppliers of new solutions)
– SMEs (not potential suppliers of solutions, but e.g. small & medium
private enterprises owned/controlled by the public sector to provide
public services that are subject to public procurement directives)
 Type 2 beneficiaries: CAs eligible for 50% rate in CP part
– Other type of beneficiaries (e.g. ‘private’ larger-than-SME entities that
are not potential suppliers of solutions for the PCP and are considered
contracting authorities under procurement Directives: e.g. large utilities
subject to 2004/17/EC)
14
Funding rate for CP part
 If all project partners that are contributing financially to the
cost of the joint PCP are type 1 beneficiaries
– Then max reimbursement rate for costs under CP part = 75%
 If all project partners that are contributing financially to the
cost of the joint PCP are type 2 beneficiaries
– Then max reimbursement rate for costs under CP part = 50%
 If there is a mix of type 1 and type 2 beneficiaries that are
contributing financially to the cost of the joint PCP, the
maximum reimbursement rate for the PCP procurement cost
under the CP part will lie in between 50% and 75%
– and will be calculated taking into account that the maximum
reimbursement rates for the financial contribution of type 1
versus type 2 beneficiaries towards the total PCP procurement
budget is 75% versus 50% respectively.
15
Activities supported
Under CSA part
 Defining the mid-to-long term solution requirements
for the required public service innovation, and resulting
specifications for a joint PCP call for tender
– Note: In their proposal for a CP-CSAs for PCP, consortia shall have jointly
identified one concrete challenge in the mid-to-long term innovation plans of the
participating public purchasers that requires new R&D that is proposed to be
procured in cooperation through PCP
 Establishing implementation methods for multinational
PCP evaluation and monitoring
 Awareness Raising, experience sharing (incl training for
public purchasers), dissemination of results,
contribution to standards/regulation to remove
obstacles for introducing PCP innovations in the market
 Cooperation agreements enabling further transnational
PCP projects and projects
16
Activities supported
Under CP part
 Execution of a joint cross-border PCP, to explore possible
alternative solution paths for the targeted improvements
in public sector services, and testing of these solutions
against a set of jointly defined performance criteria.
•
P1
P5
Choice
between
possible
constellations
for joint
procurement
P4
P3
P2
ONE joint •
PCP tender
Consortia of public
purchasers
P1->P5
"Joint procurement" means combining the
procurement actions of two or more contracting
authorities into one procurement carried out jointly.
The key defining characteristic is that there should
be only one tender published, and only one entity
awarding the resulting R&D service contracts for all
PCP phases on behalf of all participating purchasers.
Different constellations for joint procurement are
possible, but in any case, all participating
purchasers transfer their financial contribution to
the PCP into one ‘common pot’ from which all
suppliers are paid.
17
Activities supported
Under CP part
 In the "common procurement entity" constellation all
involved public purchasing authorities commonly establish or
designate one external legal entity to conduct the joint
procurement with a joint mandate and joint resources of all
public purchasing authorities.
 In the "lead authority" constellation a group of public
purchasing authorities collaborate through their existing
purchasing departments in such a way that one public
purchasing authority of the group is designated as lead
authority to conduct the joint procurement, with joint mandate
and joint resources of all purchasers, all in consultation with
other purchasing authorities involved in the joint procurement.
 "piggy-backing" can be combined with above: the one
public purchasing authority executing the procurement can
provide access to the results of the contract to a wider range of
authorities, essentially by stating in the Contract Notice that
other named public purchasing authorities may also wish to
may also wish to make use of the resulting contract a later date
(normally during the timeframe of the original contract).
18
Obj. 11.1 & App. 6: specific requirements for EC co-financed joint
cross-border PCPs
 Open dialogue with industry in preparation phase
– Announced widely, well in advance, at least in English
 EU wide publication PCP call for tender, at least in English
 All offers evaluated based on same objective criteria
– regardless of company size, geographic location of head office
 Use functional/performance based specifications
– not prescribing specific solution approach
 PCP covers phase 1 to 3, multiple companies in competition
– one framework contract/supplier with 3 specific contracts/phase
 Tenders awarded based on best value for money
(not just lowest price) and market price (no State aid)
 IPRs shared: ownership rights with companies, license free usage rights, right
to license, call back option, right to publish PCP results with procurers
 Support Europe 2020 objectives of growth and job creation
– Majority of R&D and operational activities related to PCP contract, including
principle researchers working on PCP contract in Europe*
 Avoid disproportionate qualification/financial guarantee
requirements: alternative (commercialisation plan in evaluation criteria)
* In EU Member States or Countries Associated to FP7
19
Financial regime
 CSA part
– Direct eligible costs CSA part: funded at 100%
– Indirect eligible costs CSA part: max 7% of direct eligible costs
(excluding the direct eligible costs for subcontracting and the
costs of reimbursement of resources made available by third
parties which are not used on the premises of the participant)
 CP part
– Reimbursement is limited to maximum 75% of the eligible
(direct) costs for the development of the new ICT solutions
procured through the joint PCP call for tender.
– No indirect costs (overheads)
20
Financial implications
PCP for purchasers
How to use CPCSA for PCP grant
 Example: €5 Mio CP-CSA for PCP grant


Max 30% (€1,5 Mio) for coordination costs - 100% funded
Other €3,5 Mio = EC contribution to the ICT R&D procured through the joint PCP
•
Funding rate 75% for some, 50% for other contracting authorities (CAs)
•
If consortium of only CAs all eligible for 75% rate -> PCP of € 4,66 Mio (ex VAT)
•
If consortium of only CAs all eligible for 50% rate -> PCP of € 7 Mio (ex VAT)
 Consortium brings €1,16-3,5 Mio (+VAT) for €4,93-7 Mio PCP


If consortium of CAs all eligible for 75% rate, and e.g. joint PCP under BE law then
•
VAT = 21% (€ 0,98 Mio) -> consortium invests € 2,14 Mio
If consortium of 5 CAs, and PCP phase 1-3 spread over 3 years
•
Then each project partner/CA invests €143K on average/Y over 3 years in the PCP
 Cross-border cooperation + EC funding reduces risk/cost for CAs

Joint PCP cheaper than buying R&D from one supplier on your own as CA
•
Comparing various solution approaches from different vendors
•
Defragmenting market to get in long run also cheaper large volume purchases
•
Sharing R&D cost/experience with other procurers & EC
Financial implications
for suppliers
Example CP-CSA
for PCP grant
 Example: €5-7 Mio for PCP spread over # suppliers & phases



Consider how many suppliers needed at start to get competitive supply chain at end
Typically cost increases with each phase, but less suppliers per phase
Typically €5-7 Mio PCP can finance €1-3Mio of R&D per supplier
(gradually increasing financing/phase also feasible for SMEs to bring product to market)
Example of €5-7 Mio PCP
Phase 1: Solution design
~10-15% PCP budget
~100-250K/supplier
~4-10 suppliers
P1
P5
P2
Preparation
Joint PCP
P4
P3
One Joint
PCP call for
tender
Consortia of
public procurers
P1->P5 (min 3)
Phase 2: Prototyping
~30-40% PCP budget
~500-750K/supplier
~3-6 suppliers
Supplier A
Phase 3: Original development –
operational testing
~50-60% PCP budget
~800K-2,3M/supplier
~2-4 suppliers
Supplier B
Supplier B
Supplier C
Supplier C
Supplier D
Supplier D
Supplier D
Supplier E
Supplier E
Supplier E
Supplier B
Important docs
proposal stage
 Work Programme FP7-ICT-2013, Call fiche
– Every CP-CSA on PCP has to comply with requirements on the PCP
procedure explained in Objective 11 & Appendix 6
 Guide for Applicants for CP-CSAs for PCP !
– Guidance on how to prepare and evaluate proposals
– This is a GfA “specifically tuned” to the needs of CP-CSAs for PCP !
 COM/2007/799, SEC/2007/1668 and FAQs on PCP website
– Contains the basics: why and how PCP
Expression of interest form & online networking platform
ICT proposers day
– Can help to find partners beyond traditional FP participants
Pre-proposal check
– Provides feedback on draft pre-proposal
23
Extra info day objective 11.1 on 2 October 2012, Brussels
Evaluation Criteria
Combination of All funding schemes, CSA & CP evaluation criteria
with specific connotation (detailed info in Guide for Applicants)
S/T QUALITY
IMPLEMENTATION
IMPACT







Soundness of concept and quality
of objectives.
Progress beyond the state-of-theart (relevant only to CP part).
Contribution to the coordination of
high quality research (relevant
only to CSA part).
Quality and effectiveness of the
CSA mechanisms (mechanisms
proposed to achieve the
objectives of the networking and
coordination CSA part), and
associated work plan
Quality and effectiveness of the
S/T methodology and associated
work plan (relevant only to CP
part).



Appropriateness of the
management structure
and procedures.
Quality and relevant
experience of the
individual participants.
Quality of the consortium
as a whole (including
complementarity,
balance).
Appropriate allocation
and justification of the
resources to be
committed (budget, staff,
equipment …).

Contribution at the European
level, to the expected impacts
listed in the work programme
under relevant topic/activity.
Appropriateness of measures
for the exploitation of project
results, dissemination of
knowledge, through the
engagement with
stakeholders and the public at
large, and the management of
intellectual property and for
spreading excellence.
S/T Quality
Read carefully the Guide for Applicants for CP-CSAs for PCP
Don’t forget in particular the following points (non exhaustive)
S/T QUALITY





Soundness of concept and
quality of objectives.
Progress beyond the state-ofthe-art (relevant only to CP
part of the proposal).
Contribution to the
coordination of high quality
research (relevant only to CSA
part of the proposal).
Quality and effectiveness of
the CSA mechanisms
(mechanisms proposed to
achieve the objectives of the
networking and coordination
CSA part of the project), and
associated work plan
Quality and effectiveness of
the S/T methodology and
associated work plan (relevant
only to CP part of the
proposal).
Overall approach for combining networking and coordination activities with
joint research activities (PCP procurement
of new ICT developments) to
IMPLEMENTATION
IMPACT
bring the targeted quality and efficiency improvements in the area of public
interest addressed by the project
The degree of ambition in the R&D services to be procured in the joint PCP
Justification provided in proposal that the topic proposed for the joint PCP
call for tender fits the scope of an R&D services contract
How the proposed joint networking and coordination activities strengthen
the cooperation between public bodies in Europe in the innovation of their
public services through a strategy that includes PCP, in particular through
the preparation, management and coordination of a joint PCP call for tender
(1) Overall methodology to achieve objectives of the CSA part
(2) Work Plan, Work Packages, Deliverables, Milestones for CSA part
(1) Overall methodology to achieve the objectives of the CP part
incl. how the joint PCP call for tender will be implemented in line
with objective 11.1 and Appendix 6 requirements
(2) Work Plan, Work Packages, Deliverables, Milestones for CP part
incl. joint procurement cost table
Implementation
Read carefully the Guide for Applicants for CP-CSAs for PCP
Don’t forget in particular the following points (non-exhaustive)
IMPLEMENTATION




Appropriateness
of management
structure and
procedures.
Quality and
relevant
experience of the
individual
participants.
Quality of the
consortium as a
whole (including
complementarity,
balance).
Appropriate
allocation and
justification of the
resources to be
committed (staff,
equipment …).
IMPACT
Organisational structure and decision-making process for overall CP-CSA and PCP part
How this matches the complexity and scale of the project
Relates to the direct beneficiaries of the EC grant, not to the tenderers that will participate
in the joint PCP (still unknown at time of grant signature before launch of joint PCP)
How participants collectively constitute a consortium capable of achieving project objectives:
(1) Complementarity between participants
(2) Balance in composition of the consortium in relation to the objectives of the project
(3) Appropriate level of representation (local / regional / national)
(4) Critical mass of public purchasers necessary to trigger wide implementation of the public
service innovation strategies and solutions specified and/or developed during the PCP
(5) Justification for subcontracting (in CSA / CP part), additional partners, other countries
Mobilisation of resources (staff and equipment) incl. those complementing EC contribution
How totality of resources will be integrated in a coherent way
How the overall financial plan for the project is adequate
Critical mass of public purchasers with clear financial commitments to undertake a joint PCP
Implementation
Read carefully the Guide for Applicants for CP-CSAs for PCP
Don’t forget in particular the following points (non exhaustive)
IMPACT


Contribution at the
European level, to the
expected impacts
listed in the work
programme under
relevant topic/activity.
Appropriateness of
measures for the
exploitation of project
results, dissemination
of knowledge,
through the
engagement with
stakeholders and the
public at large, and
the management of
intellectual property
and for spreading
excellence.
Contribution to impacts listed in work programme:
(1) More forward-looking, cross-border public sector approach to societal challenges
(2) Increasing opportunities for wide market uptake & economies of scale for supply side
active in Europe (more info on slide 64)
(3) Reducing fragmentation of public sector demand for new ICT solutions
The co-operation developed during the actions should also provide reliable indications
that it could continue beyond the EU funding
Explain why this requires a European (rather than a national or local) approach
(1) Wide publication of results of cross border PCP activities
(2) Removal of barriers to market introduction for the developed PCP solutions
through joint regulatory action or contribution to standardisation based on jointly
defined public sector PCP solution requirements specifications
(3) Division of IPR rights between public purchasers and companies participating in
the PCP according to Appendix 6 of the work programme.
(4) Appropriate consultation of stakeholders. Industrial/commercial involvement to
ensure wide exploitation of the results, incl. opportunity of involving SMEs
(more info on slide 65 & 66)
Background info
PCP website:
Info on calls, EU funded projects, background docs, FAQs, PCP
initiatives in Member States and Associated Countries etc
http://cordis.europa.eu/fp7/ict/pcp/home_en.html
Detailed info about PCP calls:
Calls page on PCP website links to all official call docs:
http://cordis.europa.eu/fp7/ict/pcp/calls_en.html
Call 10 website
Call 11 website
Info about PCP/PPI initiatives in MS and AC
http://cordis.europa.eu/fp7/ict/pcp/msinitiatives_en.html
Extra Slides
PCP Win-win for all
stakeholders
Politicians
Suppliers
- Better products
- Economies of scale
- Wider market size
- Shorter Time to market
-First buyer in early R&D
-Shared risks & benefits
- Quality of public services
- Focus on political priorities
- New lead markets
- Improve innovation climate
- Increase export
- Global competitiveness - Attract foreign investment
- Increase employment
Pre-commercial
Procurement
Get the ‘Best Product’…
- Address ‘public market innovation failure’
- Shape product development to public needs
- Increase technology knowledge
- Reduce risk in commercial tendering
- Favour supplier competition
- Reduce cost of procurement
- Reduce risk of innovation
… at the ‘Lowest Price’
- Pooling of resources
- Economies of scale
- No licensing costs
- ‘First time right’ product
- ‘EU interoperable’
- Attractive to venture capitalists
- Reduce unforeseen expenditure
Procurers
EU PCP/PPI support today…
Fundamental
Research
Phase 0
Curiosity
Driven
Research
… and tomorrow
Industrial research and (FP7)
Experimental Development
Phase 1
Solution Design
Phase 2
Phase 3
Prototype Original development
development up to limited volume
of first test series
Commercialisation (CIP)
Commercial Development
Phase 4
Production / early
adoption
of commercial
volumes
Phase 5
Sales of
off-the-shelf
products
Demand
Driven
Demand driven
PCP
“FP7 CP-CSA
grants to procurers
for joint PCPs”
CIP grants to
procurers
for crossborder PPIs
Fostering
wider
diffusion
VC & other financers
Input to standardisation & regulation
Supply driven
“FP7 grants to
univs & suppliers”
31