Europe’s rush to innovate

16 Jan 2024 08:15h - 09:00h

Event report

Europe is a world leader in science and research, with its innovation performance increasing for the EU as a whole by almost 10% since 2016, but the bloc struggles to capture the economic value of its innovation prowess.

With global value chains undergoing rapid transformation and key markets for European goods slowing down, how can leaders from finance, research and government come together to address the bottlenecks in Europe’s innovation ecosystem?

More info @ WEF 2024.

Knowledge Graph of Debate
Session report
Speakers

Disclaimer: This is not an official record of the WEF session. The DiploAI system automatically generates these resources from the audiovisual recording. Resources are presented in their original format, as provided by the AI (e.g. including any spelling mistakes). The accuracy of these resources cannot be guaranteed. The official record of the session can be found on the WEF YouTube channel.

Knowledge Graph of Debate

Session report

Full session report

Dimitri de Vreeze

Europe is often perceived as the museum of the world, where people visit but prefer to go elsewhere for growth and technology. This negative sentiment has persisted for a decade. However, there is a belief that Europe has the potential to leverage its research and innovation strengths to drive progress. It is argued that Europe needs to lean into these strengths and focus on areas where it can make a difference and differentiate itself. Specifically, Europe can play a significant role in bioscience, technology advantages, food, and agro-technology.

To achieve progress, public-private partnerships are considered essential. The collaboration between the public and private sectors can foster competition and innovation. This belief in working together is crucial to ensuring that public initiatives are successful.

Attracting and retaining talented researchers is also vital for Europe's development. Although the environment in Europe is attractive, many researchers choose to leave for better opportunities elsewhere, such as in the United States. To address this, Europe needs to prioritize efforts to attract and retain talent, ensuring that researchers have reasons to stay and contribute to the region's progress. The concept of a science passport is being promoted as a potential solution to support talent retention.

To further intensify science and research, certain criteria need to be met. R&D activities should be profitable to ensure continued investment and success. Innovation funding should be purpose-driven rather than merely driven by statistics. It is important to have clear objectives and goals in allocating funding to support research and development.

Additionally, investment in innovation should be scalable. While innovation in smaller markets can be potentially successful, it will not significantly impact Europe as a whole. Thus, it is crucial to focus on scalable innovations that can make a substantial difference.

Europe should strive to act as one entity in the field of science and research. The division among European countries is deemed too small-scale and limits significant innovation. Uniting European innovation under a Science and Research European Passport would help foster collaboration and maximize the region's potential.

However, there is a need for Europe to be more flexible and less controlling. Investors should be allowed the freedom to decide where to innovate, rather than being overly regulated. Greater control and regulations can put Europe at a disadvantage in global competition. Therefore, Europe must strike a balance between necessary regulations and granting sufficient autonomy for innovation.

In conclusion, although Europe has been perceived as lagging in growth and technology, there is an opportunity for the region to leverage its research and innovation strengths to drive progress. By focusing on key areas, fostering public-private partnerships, attracting and retaining talented researchers, and adopting a more flexible approach, Europe can become a global leader in innovation and industry.

Luciana Lixandru

Luciana Lixandru argues that Europe, despite its potential as a science and research powerhouse, struggles to fully capture its economic output. Despite having good STEM programmes and a similar number of developers as the US, Europe lags in GDP growth and productivity. Lixandru suggests several ways to improve economic output from innovation in Europe.

Firstly, Lixandru believes that Europe needs to focus more on combining fundamental and applied sciences. Many scientific talents from Europe have migrated to the US due to its more experimental and failure-accepting culture. Countries that have successfully combined fundamental and applied sciences earlier have been more successful in innovation and making money from it.

Secondly, Lixandru argues that Europe needs to create a culture that accepts failure. Most scientific or innovative products require experiments, and the majority of them fail. The US and some Asian countries have more accepting cultures towards failure, which has enabled them to innovate faster. Europe needs to foster an environment where failure is seen as a valuable learning experience rather than a setback.

Moreover, Lixandru suggests that Europe might benefit from more public-private partnerships. Public-private partnerships have proven to be successful in countries like the US and Asia. However, in Europe, traditional funding and regulatory structures may not facilitate experimentation and innovation. Embracing more public-private partnerships could provide the necessary financial support and regulatory flexibility for innovation to thrive in Europe.

Additionally, Lixandru emphasizes the need for better strategies to keep local talent in Europe. Currently, a significant number of AI researchers in US universities come from Europe. Lixandru suggests that a shift in strategy can help retain European talent in Europe. This could involve creating more attractive opportunities and providing incentives to encourage talented individuals to stay and contribute to Europe's innovation and economic growth.

Furthermore, Lixandru believes that Europe is not attracting and retaining enough talented individuals. The success of the US in attracting and retaining talent serves as a valuable lesson for Europe. Lixandru supports the idea that Europe should learn from the US and implement strategies to effectively attract and retain talent, ultimately bolstering the region's innovation and economic development.

Lastly, the presence of Sequoia, a renowned venture capital firm, in Europe indicates an openness for European business and encourages innovation in the region. Sequoia's decision to open an office in Europe three years ago highlights the potential and opportunity for European entrepreneurship and venture capital investment.

In conclusion, Luciana Lixandru's perspective sheds light on the challenges Europe faces in fully realising its economic output from its potential as a science and research powerhouse. By combining fundamental and applied sciences, fostering a culture that accepts failure, promoting public-private partnerships, implementing better strategies for talent retention, and encouraging entrepreneurship and venture capital investment, Europe can work towards unlocking its full potential and achieve more significant economic growth through innovation.

Iliana Ivanova

Europe's accomplishments in research, innovation, and competitiveness are recognised, with an emphasis on their importance in market competitiveness. However, there is a call for increased investment in these areas, as there is a persistent funding gap of around $100 billion per year in European research and innovation. Furthermore, access to finance is deemed crucial for the success of SMEs and startups, with initiatives like the European Innovation Council advocating for improved access. Attracting and retaining talent is also highlighted as a priority, as skilled individuals are necessary for Europe's progress in research and innovation.

The significance of artificial intelligence (AI) and high-performance supercomputing in research and innovation is stressed, as they have the potential to revolutionise various sectors. Additionally, the fast development of AI necessitates urgent action, considering the limitations of the EU decision-making process in responding effectively to AI's implications.

The positive outcomes of the European innovation agenda, including addressing funding gaps and regulatory frameworks, are acknowledged. However, more work needs to be done, particularly in terms of regulation, scaling up, and deployment, as the EU venture capital market lags behind that of the United States. Horizon Europe, one of the largest global research programs, is highlighted as a means of promoting collaboration and openness in research, with an emphasis on protecting and securing the research sector.

Efforts to simplify administrative processes and reduce reporting requirements in science and innovation funding are being made through changes to Horizon Europe. These improvements aim to create a more efficient and effective system for funding research and innovation projects.

In conclusion, while Europe has made strides in research, innovation, and competitiveness, additional investment, improved access to finance, talent attraction, and regulatory advancements are necessary for further progress. The role of AI and high-performance supercomputing is crucial in driving innovation. Horizon Europe plays a significant role in fostering collaboration and protecting the research sector. Efforts to simplify administrative processes and reduce reporting requirements are underway to enhance the effectiveness of science and innovation funding.

Maria Leptin

One argument posits that Europe is not fully capitalising on its abundance of talent. The European Research Council (ERC) has been instrumental in setting up 400 start-ups in Europe, and a significant proportion of projects supported by the ERC have resulted in outputs that are cited in patents. This highlights the potential for innovation and economic growth that exists within Europe.

However, concerns have been raised about Europe's lagging research funding and innovation compared to China and the United States. Europe has fallen behind these global competitors in terms of high-output publications and investment in research. Notably, Europe has not achieved its goal of spending 3% of its GDP on research and development, which is hindering its ability to compete on a global scale.

To address these challenges, it is crucial to create a more welcoming research environment and improve infrastructure to attract and retain researchers. Countries like the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and Switzerland, which have a high number of foreign researchers, perform exceptionally well in securing ERC grants. Foreign researchers applied more for top-level grants and achieved higher success rates compared to their national counterparts. This underscores the value of brain circulation, whereby the movement of researchers across borders enhances scientific research.

Unfortunately, there are still significant barriers to research and brain circulation in Europe. For instance, there is no researcher passport that facilitates seamless mobility across European countries. Additionally, researchers face restrictions on transferring their pensions from one country to another, which can pose challenges and deter researchers from moving. These barriers need to be addressed to fully harness the benefits of brain circulation and promote collaboration and knowledge exchange among researchers.

To remain competitive and attract talent, individual countries within Europe must make efforts to create more attractive and inclusive environments. For instance, teaching in English and providing opportunities for career growth and independence are factors that make countries more appealing to foreign talent. By making these concerted efforts, European nations can become more attractive and fuel economic growth and innovation.

In conclusion, Europe possesses immense talent, as evidenced by the success of the ERC in the establishment of start-ups and innovative outputs. However, Europe's research funding and innovation are lagging behind competitors, necessitating a deeper emphasis on creating an accommodating research environment and improving infrastructure. Furthermore, facilitating brain circulation and removing barriers to research mobility within Europe are key steps towards fostering collaboration and attracting talent. Individually, countries must strive to be more alluring and inclusive, as this will contribute to Europe's overall success in retaining talent and fostering innovation.

Nikolai Denkov

Europe was once a prominent leader in the field of science during the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s. However, it has gradually fallen behind due to its slower realization of the importance of integrating fundamental and applied sciences. Europe's failure to combine these two aspects of science has hindered its ability to remain at the forefront of innovation.

To address this issue, it is argued that Europe needs to foster a culture of experimentation and collaboration between the public and private sectors. This collaborative approach can help accelerate scientific progress and drive innovation. It is also suggested that Europe should adopt a modular approach to big projects, allowing for greater flexibility and the ability to respond to changing technological advancements.

One of the factors contributing to Europe's declining scientific innovation is its stringent regulatory environment. The strict regulations in Europe do not provide sufficient space for experimentation and innovation in the scientific field. This has impeded Europe's competitiveness and hindered its ability to keep up with countries that have a more flexible regulatory framework.

To regain its position as a leader in scientific innovation, one proposed solution is for the public sector to select and initiate funding for promising technologies that may not be readily funded by the business sector. Examples of these technologies include artificial intelligence (AI), brain research, and space technology. After a certain period of public funding, these technologies should be transferred to the private sector for further development and commercialization.

The future of AI is expected to merge with biology, creating a new level of innovation that can think and operate similarly to the human brain. This integration has the potential to revolutionize industries such as healthcare and technology.

The evaluation process for research and innovation projects is a significant challenge in Europe. The current system often involves excessive administrative procedures, which can delay progress and hinder scientific advancements. Simplifying and reducing the reporting requirements could allow researchers and innovators to focus more on real scientific and innovative results, enhancing overall scientific productivity in Europe.

In conclusion, Europe's decline in scientific innovation can be attributed to its slower adoption of integrating fundamental and applied sciences, stringent regulations, and a lack of collaboration between the public and private sectors. To regain its leading position, Europe should foster a culture of experimentation and collaboration, adopt a modular approach to big projects, initiate funding for promising technologies, streamline the evaluation process, and anticipate the integration of AI and biology. By addressing these challenges and embracing a more innovative mindset, Europe can once again become a global powerhouse in scientific innovation.

Audience

During the discussions, one of the main points that emerged was the need for additional support in the transition from patent to startup. It was highlighted that three quarters of funding for startups comes from an endowment made by licensing patents. However, it was also emphasized that having many papers and patents is not necessarily significant, apart from personal CVs. The argument put forward was that more support is required at this stage to facilitate the transition from patent to product and eventually attract the interest of large companies.

In addition to this, the importance of research and innovation in Europe was also emphasized. Martin Hirayama, the State Secretary for Education, Research, and Innovation in Switzerland, highlighted the global significance of research and innovation, stating that it is not only important for Europe but also for the international community as a whole. The discussions underlined the positive sentiment towards research and innovation and stressed the need for international cooperation in these areas.

Furthermore, concern was expressed over the possibility of Europe becoming exclusive in strategically important areas. The audience raised questions about Europe defining more strategic sectors and potentially excluding other countries. The need for international cooperation in these strategic sectors was emphasized, highlighting the importance of partnerships for achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

Another point of discussion was the complexity and bureaucracy involved in accessing public funds for research. It was argued that the process for securing public funds is too complicated and time-consuming, involving numerous steps and requiring proof at every stage. The sentiment expressed towards this issue was negative, with the belief that easier access and less bureaucracy in public funding is needed to support research efforts.

In contrast, the US model of public funding for research was considered preferable. The discussions highlighted that the US model allows for a faster and simpler process with fewer checks during the funding process. This was seen as a positive aspect of the US system and led to the argument that adopting a similar model could benefit research and innovation efforts.

In conclusion, the discussions covered various important aspects, including the need for additional support in the patent to startup transition, the importance of research and innovation in Europe and the wider international community, concerns over Europe becoming exclusive in strategic sectors, the complexity and bureaucracy involved in accessing public funds for research, and the preference for the US model of public funding. These discussions shed light on the challenges and opportunities within the research and innovation landscape and underscored the importance of collaboration and streamlining processes for effective and efficient research outcomes.

José Luis Escrivá

José Luis Escrivá identifies four major challenges in Europe that need to be addressed: the lack of risk-taking compared to the U.S., excess regulation hindering entrepreneurship, the need for initiatives to attract and retain talent, and the imperative to enhance knowledge transfer from academia to the private sector.

To address the lack of venture capital availability in Europe, Escrivá suggests that the public sector can fill this gap by utilising funds from the next generation EU. He argues that Europe can reward talent and success without compromising its income redistribution policies, emphasising that it is not a trade-off between the two. In terms of knowledge transfer, Escrivá supports utilising incentive-driven approaches to encourage collaboration between academia and the private sector.

Completing the single market in Europe is seen as advantageous, as demonstrated by the benefits experienced in the U.S. Efforts are currently underway to achieve this in sectors such as finance and labour. Additionally, Escrivá emphasises the need for greater integration within Europe, believing that further integration can help Europe catch up with other regions.

To increase labour mobility, Escrivá argues for the establishment of a single labour market in Europe. Furthermore, he suggests that Europe needs to be more ambitious in rewarding talent to drive innovation and growth.

Escrivá highlights the need to encourage the private sector to take more risks in order to spur economic growth. He points out that the European financial system is more focused on banking and lacks risk-taking institutions compared to the U.S. To address this, Escrivá argues that the public sector should play a role in promoting risk-taking.

Overall, Escrivá believes that the public sector should take an active role in addressing the challenges faced by Europe. By incentivising risk-taking, attracting and retaining talent, and promoting knowledge transfer, Europe can enhance its economic growth and position in the global market.

Speakers

Audience

Speech speed

179 words per minute

Speech length

582 words

Speech time

195 secs

Arguments

More support is needed in the transition from patent to startup and eventually getting the interest of large companies

Supporting facts:

three quarters of funding comes from an endowment made by licensing patents

having many papers and patents is basically irrelevant apart from personal CV

most startups fail

Topics: research funding, patents, startups, large companies interest

Importance of research and innovation in Europe and international cooperation

Supporting facts:

Martin Hirayama, State Secretary for Education, Research and Innovation, Switzerland, highlighted the importance of research and innovation, not only in Europe but also globally.

Topics: Research, Innovation, International Cooperation

Easier access and less bureaucracy in public funding is needed for research

Supporting facts:

Accessing public funds for research is too complicated

The process to secure public funds takes a lot of time and involves too many steps

The current system requires proof at every step, slowing down the process

Topics: public funding, innovation, bureaucracy, research funding

Report

However, it was also emphasized that having many papers and patents is not necessarily significant, apart from personal CVs. The argument put forward was that more support is required at this stage to facilitate the transition from patent to product and eventually attract the interest of large companies.

The discussions underlined the positive sentiment towards research and innovation and stressed the need for international cooperation in these areas. Furthermore, concern was expressed over the possibility of Europe becoming exclusive in strategically important areas. The audience raised questions about Europe defining more strategic sectors and potentially excluding other countries.

The need for international cooperation in these strategic sectors was emphasized, highlighting the importance of partnerships for achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Another point of discussion was the complexity and bureaucracy involved in accessing public funds for research. It was argued that the process for securing public funds is too complicated and time-consuming, involving numerous steps and requiring proof at every stage.

The sentiment expressed towards this issue was negative, with the belief that easier access and less bureaucracy in public funding is needed to support research efforts. In contrast, the US model of public funding for research was considered preferable. The discussions highlighted that the US model allows for a faster and simpler process with fewer checks during the funding process.

This was seen as a positive aspect of the US system and led to the argument that adopting a similar model could benefit research and innovation efforts. In conclusion, the discussions covered various important aspects, including the need for additional support in the patent to startup transition, the importance of research and innovation in Europe and the wider international community, concerns over Europe becoming exclusive in strategic sectors, the complexity and bureaucracy involved in accessing public funds for research, and the preference for the US model of public funding.

These discussions shed light on the challenges and opportunities within the research and innovation landscape and underscored the importance of collaboration and streamlining processes for effective and efficient research outcomes.

Dimitri de Vreeze

Speech speed

210 words per minute

Speech length

1248 words

Speech time

356 secs

Arguments

Europe perceived as the world's museum

Supporting facts:

Professor Kishore Mabobami described Europe as the museum of the world where people visit but prefer to go elsewhere for growth and technology

Opinion still prevalent a decade later

Topics: Europe, Investment, Growth

Europe needs to lean into its research and innovation strength

Supporting facts:

Belief in sufficient research or innovation talent or capability in Europe

pointed out a mistake of European approach where It's assumed if Europe is intensive in knowledge, the progress will come

Topics: Research and Development, Innovation, Europe

Europe should choose where to focus its resources wisely

Supporting facts:

Europe needs to make choices and focus on areas where it makes difference and it has differentiation

Europe should play in bioscience, technology advantages, food and agro

Topics: Europe, Strategic Investment, Bioscience, Food and Agro technology

Need to attract talents who also stay in Europe

Supporting facts:

Researchers wanted to stay in Europe, but went back due to bigger opportunities in US

The environment in Europe is attractive

Topics: Talent Attraction, Europe, Science

Certain criteria need to be met for further intensification of science and research

Supporting facts:

For intensification, it is necessary to choose where to play based on leadership positions, seek differentiation and scalability, and strive for profit

Topics: Funding, Innovation, R&D, Science & Research

Relying on existing private business for scale and manufacturing is inefficient

Supporting facts:

Existing businesses may protect their own interests over expansion

Public-private partnerships can foster competition and innovation

Topics: Innovation, Private Sector, Public-Private Partnership

Europe should act as one entity in the field of Science and research

Supporting facts:

Europe divided by country is too small scale for significant innovation

Mentioned Science and Research European Passport as means to unite European innovation

Topics: European Union, Innovation, Science and Research European Passport

Report

It is argued that Europe needs to lean into these strengths and focus on areas where it can make a difference and differentiate itself. Specifically, Europe can play a significant role in bioscience, technology advantages, food, and agro-technology. To achieve progress, public-private partnerships are considered essential.

The collaboration between the public and private sectors can foster competition and innovation. This belief in working together is crucial to ensuring that public initiatives are successful. Attracting and retaining talented researchers is also vital for Europe's development. Although the environment in Europe is attractive, many researchers choose to leave for better opportunities elsewhere, such as in the United States.

To address this, Europe needs to prioritize efforts to attract and retain talent, ensuring that researchers have reasons to stay and contribute to the region's progress. The concept of a science passport is being promoted as a potential solution to support talent retention.

Therefore, Europe must strike a balance between necessary regulations and granting sufficient autonomy for innovation. In conclusion, although Europe has been perceived as lagging in growth and technology, there is an opportunity for the region to leverage its research and innovation strengths to drive progress.

By focusing on key areas, fostering public-private partnerships, attracting and retaining talented researchers, and adopting a more flexible approach, Europe can become a global leader in innovation and industry.

Iliana Ivanova

Speech speed

166 words per minute

Speech length

1389 words

Speech time

501 secs

Arguments

Recognition of Europe's accomplishments in research, innovation, and competitiveness

Supporting facts:

Acknowledging Europe's progress in these areas over the years

Importance of research and innovation in market competitiveness

Topics: Research, Innovation, Competitiveness

Access to finance is crucial for SMEs and startups

Supporting facts:

Importance of transitioning from the research and innovation phase to market deployment and scale-up

Role of the European Innovation Council in pushing for access to finance

Topics: Finance, SMEs, Startups

AI and high performance supercomputing are huge and important elements for research and innovation

Topics: AI, supercomputing, research, innovation

Need for urgency to act due to fast development of AI and limitations of EU decision-making process

Topics: AI, decision making, EU

European innovation agenda has delivered with 25 actions addressing funding gap, regulatory framework and other areas

Supporting facts:

$1 billion funding to deep tech start-ups, producing 13 unicorns

Topics: European innovation agenda, funding, regulatory framework

Openness and increasing association with countries for research

Supporting facts:

Horizon Europe is one of the biggest public research programs in the world, with participants from over 180 countries

Promotion and expansion of this direction is one of her personal priorities

Topics: Horizon Europe, International Cooperation, Research and Innovation

Iliana Ivanova is dedicated to simplifying and reducing the administrative burden in science and innovation funding.

Supporting facts:

Horizon Europe is undergoing changes next year to reduce administrative burdens and simplify cost options

Topics: Administrative burden, Science and innovation funding, Simplification

Report

Furthermore, access to finance is deemed crucial for the success of SMEs and startups, with initiatives like the European Innovation Council advocating for improved access. Attracting and retaining talent is also highlighted as a priority, as skilled individuals are necessary for Europe's progress in research and innovation.

Horizon Europe, one of the largest global research programs, is highlighted as a means of promoting collaboration and openness in research, with an emphasis on protecting and securing the research sector. Efforts to simplify administrative processes and reduce reporting requirements in science and innovation funding are being made through changes to Horizon Europe.

These improvements aim to create a more efficient and effective system for funding research and innovation projects. In conclusion, while Europe has made strides in research, innovation, and competitiveness, additional investment, improved access to finance, talent attraction, and regulatory advancements are necessary for further progress.

The role of AI and high-performance supercomputing is crucial in driving innovation. Horizon Europe plays a significant role in fostering collaboration and protecting the research sector. Efforts to simplify administrative processes and reduce reporting requirements are underway to enhance the effectiveness of science and innovation funding.

José Luis Escrivá

Speech speed

171 words per minute

Speech length

802 words

Speech time

281 secs

Arguments

José Luis Escrivá believes there are four major challenges in Europe that need to be addressed

Supporting facts:

He discussed the lack of risk-taking in Europe compared to the U.S.

He mentions excess regulation hampering entrepreneurship

He talks about the need for initiatives to attract and retain talent

He emphasizes on improving the transfer of knowledge from academia to private sector

Topics: Risk-taking, Regulation, Talent retention, Knowledge transfer

Europe should aim to complete its single market

Supporting facts:

Using the US as an example, a complete single market can bring significant advantages

Efforts are currently underway to complete the market in areas like the financial sector and labor market

Topics: single market, financial sector, labor market

Need to offer a single labor market in Europe for more mobility

Supporting facts:

Initiatives from the Commission and at the European-wide level for the Blue Card initiatives

Single permit direction initiative from Spanish presidency

Topics: European Talent, Labour Mobility, Single Labor Market

Europe needs to be more ambitious in rewarding talent

Supporting facts:

Reluctance in Europe to strongly reward talent due to culture of equating

Topics: European Talent, Work Culture, Rewards

Europe needs to encourage the private sector to take more risks

Supporting facts:

European financial system is more bankerized

Lack of risk-taking institutions in Europe

Topics: European financial system, Risk taking

Europe lacks a unified and risk-friendly capital market like US

Supporting facts:

US financial system is more oriented towards risk taking and capital market

More measures required from the public sector to improve risk appetite

Topics: European financial system, Capital market, Risk taking

Report

In terms of knowledge transfer, Escrivá supports utilising incentive-driven approaches to encourage collaboration between academia and the private sector. Completing the single market in Europe is seen as advantageous, as demonstrated by the benefits experienced in the U.S. Efforts are currently underway to achieve this in sectors such as finance and labour.

Additionally, Escrivá emphasises the need for greater integration within Europe, believing that further integration can help Europe catch up with other regions. To increase labour mobility, Escrivá argues for the establishment of a single labour market in Europe. Furthermore, he suggests that Europe needs to be more ambitious in rewarding talent to drive innovation and growth.

Initiatives for greater labour mobility, such as the Blue Card and single-permit direction initiatives, are supported by Escrivá. These initiatives aim to facilitate mobility and make it easier for individuals to work across European countries. Escrivá highlights the need to encourage the private sector to take more risks in order to spur economic growth.

He points out that the European financial system is more focused on banking and lacks risk-taking institutions compared to the U.S. To address this, Escrivá argues that the public sector should play a role in promoting risk-taking. Overall, Escrivá believes that the public sector should take an active role in addressing the challenges faced by Europe.

By incentivising risk-taking, attracting and retaining talent, and promoting knowledge transfer, Europe can enhance its economic growth and position in the global market.

Luciana Lixandru

Speech speed

177 words per minute

Speech length

1098 words

Speech time

371 secs

Arguments

Luciana Lixandru believes Europe is a science and research powerhouse that struggles to fully capture its economic output

Supporting facts:

Despite good STEM programs and developer numbers similar to the US, Europe lags in GDP growth and productivity

Topics: Innovation, Economy, European Tech Industry

Europe has to focus more on combining fundamental and applied sciences

Supporting facts:

Many scientific talents from Europe have migrated to the US because of its more experimental and failure-accepting culture.

Countries that combined fundamental and applied sciences earlier are more successful in innovation and making money from it.

Topics: Science and Technology, Education, Research and Development

Europe needs to create a culture that accepts failure

Supporting facts:

Most scientific or innovative products require experiments and the majority of them fail.

The US and some Asian countries have more accepting cultures towards failure, which enabled them to innovate faster.

Topics: Cultural Dynamics, Entrepreneurship

Europe might benefit from more public-private partnerships

Supporting facts:

Public-private partnerships have been successful in countries like the US and Asia.

Traditional funding and regulatory structures in Europe may not facilitated experimentation and innovation.

Topics: Financing, Private Sector, Public Sector

The need for better strategies to keep local talents

Supporting facts:

A third of AI researchers in US universities come from Europe.

A shift in strategy can help retain European talents in Europe.

Topics: Education, Migration, Labor Market

Luciana Lixandru believes that enough talents aren't being attracted and retained.

Topics: Talent Attraction, Human Capital, Migration

Sequoia is open for business in Europe

Supporting facts:

Sequoia opened an office in Europe three years ago

Topics: Entrepreneurship, Venture Capital, Financial System

Report

Lixandru suggests several ways to improve economic output from innovation in Europe. Firstly, Lixandru believes that Europe needs to focus more on combining fundamental and applied sciences. Many scientific talents from Europe have migrated to the US due to its more experimental and failure-accepting culture.

Countries that have successfully combined fundamental and applied sciences earlier have been more successful in innovation and making money from it. Secondly, Lixandru argues that Europe needs to create a culture that accepts failure. Most scientific or innovative products require experiments, and the majority of them fail.

The US and some Asian countries have more accepting cultures towards failure, which has enabled them to innovate faster. Europe needs to foster an environment where failure is seen as a valuable learning experience rather than a setback. Moreover, Lixandru suggests that Europe might benefit from more public-private partnerships.

Public-private partnerships have proven to be successful in countries like the US and Asia. However, in Europe, traditional funding and regulatory structures may not facilitate experimentation and innovation. Embracing more public-private partnerships could provide the necessary financial support and regulatory flexibility for innovation to thrive in Europe.

This could involve creating more attractive opportunities and providing incentives to encourage talented individuals to stay and contribute to Europe's innovation and economic growth. Furthermore, Lixandru believes that Europe is not attracting and retaining enough talented individuals. The success of the US in attracting and retaining talent serves as a valuable lesson for Europe.

Lixandru supports the idea that Europe should learn from the US and implement strategies to effectively attract and retain talent, ultimately bolstering the region's innovation and economic development. Lastly, the presence of Sequoia, a renowned venture capital firm, in Europe indicates an openness for European business and encourages innovation in the region.

Sequoia's decision to open an office in Europe three years ago highlights the potential and opportunity for European entrepreneurship and venture capital investment. In conclusion, Luciana Lixandru's perspective sheds light on the challenges Europe faces in fully realising its economic output from its potential as a science and research powerhouse.

By combining fundamental and applied sciences, fostering a culture that accepts failure, promoting public-private partnerships, implementing better strategies for talent retention, and encouraging entrepreneurship and venture capital investment, Europe can work towards unlocking its full potential and achieve more significant economic growth through innovation.

Maria Leptin

Speech speed

179 words per minute

Speech length

1120 words

Speech time

376 secs

Arguments

Europe has a lot of talent but isn't making the most of its potential

Supporting facts:

The European Research Council has led to the foundation of 400 start-ups in Europe

More than 44% of projects from the ERC lead to outputs that are cited in patents

Topics: Science, Research, Talent, Europe

Brain circulation is beneficial for scientific research

Supporting facts:

Countries like UK, Netherlands and Switzerland with the high number of foreign researchers perform best in attracting ERC grants

Foreign researchers apply more to the ERC for top-level grants and are more successful than their national counterparts

Topics: Scientific Research, Brain Circulation, Mobility

There are still too many barriers for research and brain circulation in Europe

Supporting facts:

There is no researcher passport for all of Europe

Researchers cannot transfer their pensions from one country to another

Topics: Scientific Research, Brain Circulation, Mobility

Locally, individual countries have to make efforts to be more attractive to attract talent.

Supporting facts:

Teaching in these countries is in English, making it easier for foreign talent to integrate.

Careers are fluid, which presents opportunities for growth.

Junior employees are given independence.

Topics: Talent Acquisition, Mobility, Language

Important to get rid of borders in Europe.

Topics: Mobility

Report

This highlights the potential for innovation and economic growth that exists within Europe. However, concerns have been raised about Europe's lagging research funding and innovation compared to China and the United States. Europe has fallen behind these global competitors in terms of high-output publications and investment in research.

Notably, Europe has not achieved its goal of spending 3% of its GDP on research and development, which is hindering its ability to compete on a global scale. To address these challenges, it is crucial to create a more welcoming research environment and improve infrastructure to attract and retain researchers.

Countries like the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and Switzerland, which have a high number of foreign researchers, perform exceptionally well in securing ERC grants. Foreign researchers applied more for top-level grants and achieved higher success rates compared to their national counterparts.

This underscores the value of brain circulation, whereby the movement of researchers across borders enhances scientific research. Unfortunately, there are still significant barriers to research and brain circulation in Europe. For instance, there is no researcher passport that facilitates seamless mobility across European countries.

Additionally, researchers face restrictions on transferring their pensions from one country to another, which can pose challenges and deter researchers from moving. These barriers need to be addressed to fully harness the benefits of brain circulation and promote collaboration and knowledge exchange among researchers.

By making these concerted efforts, European nations can become more attractive and fuel economic growth and innovation. In conclusion, Europe possesses immense talent, as evidenced by the success of the ERC in the establishment of start-ups and innovative outputs. However, Europe's research funding and innovation are lagging behind competitors, necessitating a deeper emphasis on creating an accommodating research environment and improving infrastructure.

Furthermore, facilitating brain circulation and removing barriers to research mobility within Europe are key steps towards fostering collaboration and attracting talent. Individually, countries must strive to be more alluring and inclusive, as this will contribute to Europe's overall success in retaining talent and fostering innovation.

Nikolai Denkov

Speech speed

174 words per minute

Speech length

1123 words

Speech time

386 secs

Arguments

Europe was once a leading science power but fell behind due to slower realization of the need to combine fundamental and applied sciences.

Supporting facts:

Europe led in scientific strength in the 60s, 70s, 80s.

Topics: Science, Innovation, Europe, US, Asia

Lack of supportive regulations is obstructing Europe's ability to compete with other countries in scientific innovation.

Supporting facts:

Europe's stringent regulations do not allow space for experimentation in scientific innovation.

Topics: Science, Innovation, Regulation, Europe

Public sector should select promising technologies that aren't readily fundable by the business sector, such as AI, brain research, space technology, initiating initial funding for these areas.

Supporting facts:

AI is now different because it received funding years ago.

ERC is an example of public sector selecting promising technologies.

Understanding brain research can give an advantage in developing technology for medical applications and AI.

Netherlands created institutes in core areas with public funding, with the expectation for them to work with companies after 10 years.

Topics: Artificial Intelligence, Brain Research, Space Technology, Public Sector Investment

The next level of AI will merge biology and AI research, and will think like the human brain.

Topics: Artificial Intelligence, Brain Research, Biology

The biggest problem is how research or innovation project results are evaluated

Supporting facts:

Typically, evaluation goes with a lot of administrative procedures

Topics: innovation, research, project evaluation

Report

After a certain period of public funding, these technologies should be transferred to the private sector for further development and commercialization. The future of AI is expected to merge with biology, creating a new level of innovation that can think and operate similarly to the human brain.

This integration has the potential to revolutionize industries such as healthcare and technology. The evaluation process for research and innovation projects is a significant challenge in Europe. The current system often involves excessive administrative procedures, which can delay progress and hinder scientific advancements.

Simplifying and reducing the reporting requirements could allow researchers and innovators to focus more on real scientific and innovative results, enhancing overall scientific productivity in Europe. In conclusion, Europe's decline in scientific innovation can be attributed to its slower adoption of integrating fundamental and applied sciences, stringent regulations, and a lack of collaboration between the public and private sectors.

To regain its leading position, Europe should foster a culture of experimentation and collaboration, adopt a modular approach to big projects, initiate funding for promising technologies, streamline the evaluation process, and anticipate the integration of AI and biology. By addressing these challenges and embracing a more innovative mindset, Europe can once again become a global powerhouse in scientific innovation.

Europe’s rush to innovate

Event report

Table of contents

Knowledge Graph of Debate

Session report

Full session report

Dimitri de Vreeze

Luciana Lixandru

Iliana Ivanova

Maria Leptin

Nikolai Denkov

Audience

José Luis Escrivá

Speakers

Audience

Arguments

More support is needed in the transition from patent to startup and eventually getting the interest of large companies

Importance of research and innovation in Europe and international cooperation

Easier access and less bureaucracy in public funding is needed for research

Report

Dimitri de Vreeze

Arguments

Europe perceived as the world's museum

Europe needs to lean into its research and innovation strength

Europe should choose where to focus its resources wisely

Need to attract talents who also stay in Europe

Certain criteria need to be met for further intensification of science and research

Relying on existing private business for scale and manufacturing is inefficient

Europe should act as one entity in the field of Science and research

Report

Iliana Ivanova

Arguments

Recognition of Europe's accomplishments in research, innovation, and competitiveness

Access to finance is crucial for SMEs and startups

AI and high performance supercomputing are huge and important elements for research and innovation

Need for urgency to act due to fast development of AI and limitations of EU decision-making process

European innovation agenda has delivered with 25 actions addressing funding gap, regulatory framework and other areas

Openness and increasing association with countries for research

Iliana Ivanova is dedicated to simplifying and reducing the administrative burden in science and innovation funding.

Report

José Luis Escrivá

Arguments

José Luis Escrivá believes there are four major challenges in Europe that need to be addressed

Europe should aim to complete its single market

Need to offer a single labor market in Europe for more mobility

Europe needs to be more ambitious in rewarding talent

Europe needs to encourage the private sector to take more risks

Europe lacks a unified and risk-friendly capital market like US

Report

Luciana Lixandru

Arguments

Luciana Lixandru believes Europe is a science and research powerhouse that struggles to fully capture its economic output

Europe has to focus more on combining fundamental and applied sciences

Europe needs to create a culture that accepts failure

Europe might benefit from more public-private partnerships

The need for better strategies to keep local talents

Luciana Lixandru believes that enough talents aren't being attracted and retained.

Sequoia is open for business in Europe

Report

Maria Leptin

Arguments

Europe has a lot of talent but isn't making the most of its potential

Brain circulation is beneficial for scientific research

There are still too many barriers for research and brain circulation in Europe

Locally, individual countries have to make efforts to be more attractive to attract talent.

Important to get rid of borders in Europe.

Report

Nikolai Denkov

Arguments

Europe was once a leading science power but fell behind due to slower realization of the need to combine fundamental and applied sciences.

Lack of supportive regulations is obstructing Europe's ability to compete with other countries in scientific innovation.

Public sector should select promising technologies that aren't readily fundable by the business sector, such as AI, brain research, space technology, initiating initial funding for these areas.

The next level of AI will merge biology and AI research, and will think like the human brain.

The biggest problem is how research or innovation project results are evaluated

Report

Related event

AI and Digital @ WEF 2024 in Davos