1. ‘‘EU-EaP STI Cooperation in Addressing Health Research and Innovation’’ Policy Stakeholders Conference, Budapest, 16-17 May 2016 Report of the Panel ‘‘Challenges & tendencies in health related R&I issues and international fields of potential cooperation’’ Rapporteur: Yannis Kechagiaras, Project Manager, CeRISS, Athens/Greece

2. Participants from EaP countries 1. Representative of the Ministry of Health, Azerbaijan 2. Igor Karpov, Head of the Department of Infectious Diseases, Belarus State Medical University, Belarus 3. Seyran Kocharyan, Head of Science Department, Yerevan State Medical University after M. Heratsi, Armenia 4. Olesia Lynovytska, Vice-rector of International Relation, Research and Education, Bogomolets National Medical University, Ukraine 5. Maia Okujava, Associate Professor, Health NCP, Tbilisi State Medical University, Georgia 6. Victor Vovc, Head of the Human Physiology & Biophysics Department, State University of Medicine and Pharmacy “Nicolae Testemitanu”, Moldova Participants from EU countries 1. Martine Batoux, Coordinator of Infect-ERA, French National Research Agency, France 2. Gábor Deme, Vice President, Hungarian Society for Innovation, Innomed Medical Zrt., Hungary 3. Remko van Leeuwen, Director of Acquisition, Amsterdam Institute for Global Health and Development (AIGHD), Netherlands 4. Tanja Weis, Coordinator of BestAgeing project, University Hospital Heidelberg, Internal Medicine III, Cardiology, Germany

3. H2020 WP Topics of high EaP interest:  Promotion of mental health & well-being  Addressing rare infectious deseases  Cardiovascular deseases  Neuro-degenerative deseases

4. Main focus of discussion: CHALLENGES/ BARRIERS OF COOPERATION (mainly within H2020) -H2020 very competitive instrument -Recent statistics (5% success rate) -«be absolutely sure about what you want to propose» -Need more research for therapeutic approaches including innovative health research (provide solutions)

5. What is missing/what’s new context: - private funding is more attractive and efficient than public funding - Apart from academics, industry sector is needed  need to develop products not only ideas + patents - Industry partners in consortia is positive for evaluators + for the project’s results - A new era where inter-disciplinary approaches give more answers to main challenges - Need for a mix of different partners including SMEs, private companies, evaluating institutions

6. How to Widen Participation in H2020 with inclusion of EaP countries?  flexibility is needed from researchers, to adopt to calls  more partnering events are needed to see capacity/resources with EaP & with industry  more SMEs from EaP (not research SMEs); Need to create SMEs through spin-off/start-up programmes  more emphasis to innovation and market needs (teach innovation)

7. How to Widen Participation in H2020 with inclusion of EaP countries?  consumers’ involvement in the proposals  to harmonise EaP national funding practices with EU (mainly for ERANETs) Quote: «Participation in H2020 is a compromise, compromise of streams of interests & expertises; Need to introduce new ways of thinking; To change mentality»

8. Which mechanisms should be established for a bigger H2020 participation of EaP? - Mutual information exchange; EU needs to be approached by interested EaP researchers and vice- versa - Curing language barriers - Need to «advertise» their expertise; Make weaknesses strengths - Stimulate motivation of EaP researchers (national incentives)

9. Main conclusions/Wrap-up:  EaP research community to adopt to new R&I conditions, i.e. H2020 more innovation and market oriented, more competitive  Industry and SMEs important players in this new context  Need for mutual understanding through partnering events (to understand needs, capacity, expertise of EaP countries)

10. THANK YOU VERY MUCH!