Europe's Research Ambitions Face a Funding Reality Check
European universities stand at a critical juncture as the continent prepares for the next major research and innovation framework programme. While ambitious goals in areas such as climate action, digital transformation and health innovation require robust institutional foundations, many experts argue that an over-reliance on competitive project-based funding risks undermining the very capacities needed to deliver results.
Project funding, exemplified by programmes like Horizon Europe, provides targeted support for specific research initiatives. In contrast, institutional funding offers stable core resources that sustain laboratories, staff development, doctoral training and long-term strategic planning. The distinction matters because successful projects build on pre-existing strengths that only sustained institutional investment can create.
Horizon Europe and the Dominance of Project-Based Support
Horizon Europe serves as the European Union's flagship research and innovation programme, with an indicative budget of around €95.5 billion for the 2021-2027 period. It funds collaborative projects across excellent science, global challenges and innovative Europe pillars, attracting universities, research organisations and industry partners from member states and associated countries.
Success in securing these grants has become a key performance indicator for many institutions. Leading universities such as KU Leuven, the University of Copenhagen and Ghent University have secured hundreds of millions in cumulative awards. Yet this competitive model demands significant upfront investment in proposal preparation, matching funds and administrative capacity — resources that often come from already strained core budgets.
Analyses from the European University Association highlight how public funding remains the dominant source for most universities, yet the balance between stable allocations and competitive streams continues to shift. Performance-based and project elements have grown, creating a more complex financial landscape across the continent.
The Case for Stronger Institutional Foundations
Experts emphasise that project funding rewards institutions already possessing strong teams, modern infrastructure and professional support offices. Without parallel investment in these foundations, weaker or newer universities struggle to compete, potentially concentrating excellence in a handful of established centres.
Adam Kola, vice-rector for research at Nicolaus Copernicus University in Poland and vice-president of the Young European Research Universities Network, has argued that Europe cannot build competitiveness on projects alone. Research projects depend on capacities built long before any call opens: stable research groups, doctoral schools, grant support structures and the ability to invest ahead of external funding.
A 2025 European University Association report on financially sustainable universities underscored the growing gap between rising institutional costs — including salaries and infrastructure — and core public income. This squeeze leaves many institutions less able to absorb the full costs of participating in large European projects.
National Examples: Poland's IDUB Programme as a Model
Poland illustrates both the opportunities and tensions. Public subsidies for 21 comprehensive universities rose nominally between 2021 and 2025, yet real-terms growth lagged behind inflation and university-specific cost increases. At the same time, the Excellence Initiative – Research University (IDUB) programme provides multiannual institutional funding tied to strategic plans, external evaluation and commitments to strengthen research capacity.
At Nicolaus Copernicus University, IDUB support has bolstered teams, recruitment, doctoral education and shared infrastructure outside major metropolitan areas. This approach bridges the gap between unrestricted core funding and narrowly defined project grants, creating conditions where more institutions can succeed in competitive calls.
Similar tensions appear across central and eastern Europe, where universities pursue greater participation in European programmes while operating with narrower funding bases and less developed regional innovation ecosystems.
Impacts on Researchers, Staff and Institutional Strategy
Over-dependence on project funding creates uncertainty for early-career researchers and support staff. Short-term contracts tied to specific grants limit long-term career planning and institutional knowledge retention. Universities may prioritise quick-win projects over sustained, curiosity-driven work that builds deeper expertise.
Administrative burdens also rise. Preparing competitive proposals, managing reporting requirements and absorbing audit costs consume resources that could otherwise support teaching or core research. Smaller institutions with leaner support teams feel these pressures most acutely.
Strategic autonomy suffers when institutions must constantly align activities with external funding priorities rather than their own long-term missions. This can fragment research agendas and reduce the ability to respond to emerging regional or societal needs.
Challenges for Widening Participation and Cohesion
European policy places strong emphasis on widening participation and spreading excellence. Yet repeated success in project funding tends to reinforce existing concentrations of resources and reputation. Older, capital-city universities often enjoy advantages in networks, co-financing capacity and administrative scale.
Younger research-oriented universities, including members of networks focused on emerging institutions, bring strong regional embeddedness and international ambition. They help connect peripheral regions to European knowledge flows and support economic adaptation. A system that consistently favours established players risks narrowing the overall institutional base from which future excellence can emerge.
Recommendations for the Next Framework Programme
As discussions advance on FP10, the successor to Horizon Europe, several priorities have emerged. Greater coverage of full project costs would reduce pressure on institutional budgets. Simplification of application, reporting and audit processes would lower barriers, particularly for institutions with smaller support structures.
FP10 should operate alongside cohesion funding, national excellence programmes and other instruments as complementary layers. Success metrics should track not only project outputs but also the durable teams, infrastructure and partnerships that remain after funding ends.
Widening instruments and European University alliances deserve evaluation on their contribution to lasting institutional capacity, not solely participation numbers or mobility figures.
European University Alliances and Long-Term Collaboration
The European Universities initiative has moved beyond traditional project-based cooperation. Alliances involving hundreds of institutions have established innovative governance structures and, in some cases, legal entities to sustain collaboration. This evolution demonstrates the value of institutional-level investment in shared strategies for education, research and innovation.
Complementary support from Horizon Europe for the research dimension of alliances has helped strengthen these partnerships. Yet sustained progress depends on stable national and institutional resources that allow universities to participate meaningfully over multiple years.
Photo by Octavian-Dan Craciun on Unsplash
Future Outlook and the Path to Balanced Funding
The next multiannual financial framework will shape Europe's research investment for years ahead. A larger budget for the framework programme alone will not guarantee stronger outcomes if institutional foundations continue to weaken under cost pressures and competitive demands.
Combining core public funding, targeted institutional excellence programmes and competitive project funding offers the most promising route to a broader, more resilient European research system. Each element serves distinct functions that cannot be substituted for one another.
Universities across the continent are already demonstrating how strategic use of multiple funding streams can build capacity. Scaling these approaches while addressing disparities between regions and institution types will be essential for delivering on Europe's collective ambitions.
Actionable Insights for University Leaders and Policymakers
University leaders can strengthen their position by developing clear strategies that integrate project participation with institutional capacity building. This includes investing in professional grant support, protecting core research time and fostering internal excellence initiatives that prepare teams for external competition.
Policymakers at national and EU levels should design funding architectures that reward both excellence and the conditions that enable it. Realistic cost coverage, reduced administrative burdens and complementary instruments that strengthen the wider research base will help ensure that increased investment translates into lasting capability.
Stakeholders across the sector — from researchers and administrators to national ministries and the European Commission — share an interest in moving from a project-centric model toward one that sustains the institutions capable of repeated success.