Research-intensive universities from key associated countries are raising their voices in a unified call for seamless participation in the European Union's forthcoming research and innovation flagship programme. Leaders from the United Kingdom's Russell Group, Switzerland's swissuniversities, Canada's U15 Group of Canadian Research Universities, and Universities New Zealand have jointly urged EU policymakers to grant 'day one' access to Framework Programme 10 (FP10), the successor to Horizon Europe set to launch in 2028. This push comes at a pivotal moment as discussions intensify around FP10's design and budget, highlighting the critical role these non-EU partners play in amplifying Europe's research ecosystem.

The demand stems from hard-learned lessons from Horizon Europe, the current €95.5 billion programme running from 2021 to 2027, where political hurdles delayed full participation for several nations. Universities emphasize that early political commitments would prevent similar disruptions, ensuring continuous collaboration on pressing global challenges like climate resilience, digital transformation, and technological competitiveness.

Background on Horizon Europe and the Association Model

Horizon Europe represents the European Union's primary vehicle for funding research and innovation, channeling resources into collaborative projects that span fundamental science to market-ready breakthroughs. Unlike non-associated third countries, which face restrictions on leading projects or accessing certain pillars, associated countries secure full rights by signing international agreements and contributing financially to the EU budget proportional to their gross domestic product.

This model fosters deeper integration. For instance, associated nations can lead work packages, coordinate consortia, and fully engage in prestigious schemes like the European Research Council (ERC) grants and Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions (MSCA) for researcher mobility. The process involves Council approval, financial commitments, and alignment with EU strategic interests, but delays have historically hampered momentum.

Today, over 20 countries beyond the EU-27 are associated or in advanced negotiations, including longstanding partners like Norway and Iceland, and newer entrants such as the UK and Switzerland. Canada and New Zealand recently joined the ranks, bringing diverse expertise in areas like quantum computing and sustainable agriculture.

Past Delays: The Cost of Uncertainty

The road to association has not been smooth. The United Kingdom, once the second-largest Horizon contributor, endured a three-year limbo post-Brexit, missing out on €2 billion in potential funding and disrupting thousands of collaborations. Swiss researchers faced similar barriers from 2021 to 2025 due to bilateral treaty disputes, prompting temporary 'third-country' status with limited access.

These interruptions led to fragmented teams, diverted resources to national alternatives, and lost opportunities in high-impact areas. UK participation, now rebounding, still lags pre-Brexit levels at 60-70% in some clusters, despite successes in ERC awards where British institutions secured 15% of grants in recent calls. Such gaps underscore the urgency for proactive measures in FP10.

Financial Contributions and Mutual Benefits

Associated countries do not merely participate; they invest substantially, expanding the programme's reach. Their contributions—calculated at around 7.8% of GDP—add approximately one-third to the total pot beyond EU member states' inputs. For Horizon Europe, this has translated to enhanced project scales, broader talent pools, and accelerated innovation diffusion.

Take Canada: U15 universities have led initiatives in health tech and AI, injecting expertise that complements European strengths. New Zealand excels in environmental modelling, vital for EU green goals. Switzerland's precision engineering prowess bolsters missions like cancer research, while the UK's interdisciplinary hubs drive cross-cluster synergies. These inputs yield returns: associated partners often secure higher success rates due to established networks, fostering a virtuous cycle of excellence.

EU statistics portals reveal that non-EU associated participation now accounts for 20% of grants in competitive pillars, proving the model's efficacy.

Photo by Julia Taubitz on Unsplash

The Joint Statement: Core Demands Unveiled

Delivered to the Cypriot Presidency ahead of the May 29 Competitiveness Council, the letter outlines precise asks. Foremost is guaranteed 'day one' entry via early negotiations, sidestepping the protracted approvals that plagued Horizon Europe.

• Maintain a robust Pillar II for collaborative challenges, research-led and inclusive of fundamental work.
• Complement—not subsume—into the proposed €50 billion European Competitiveness Fund (ECF).
• Grant observers from associated countries seats in Pillar II governance.
• Minimize eligibility exclusions and equalize treatment in evaluations.
• Preserve ERC and MSCA independence for bottom-up innovation.

This blueprint envisions FP10 as a 'crucial platform' amid geopolitical strains, with signatories hailing association expansion as a 'tremendous achievement.'

Read the full joint letter here.

FP10's Proposed Landscape and Budget Outlook

The European Commission unveiled FP10 outlines in July 2025, proposing €175 billion—nearly double Horizon Europe's allocation—to fuel 2028-2034 priorities. This includes missions on climate neutrality, AI sovereignty, and health security, with a standalone research pillar emphasizing openness.

Yet funding concerns loom. Parliamentarians push for €200 billion, citing competitiveness gaps versus US and China investments. MFF (Multiannual Financial Framework) negotiations, intertwined with FP10, face fiscal austerity pressures post-recovery funds. Associated countries' extra third could tip scales toward ambition, but only with assured involvement.

Stakeholder Perspectives Across Europe

European university alliances echo the call. The European University Association (EUA) stresses that inclusive association maximizes talent inflows, while League of European Research Universities (LERU) warns delays erode trust. National bodies in Ireland and the Netherlands highlight lost synergies in joint projects.

Industry views align: BusinessEurope advocates stable partnerships for tech transfer. Policymakers, per Council whispers, recognize the diplomatic wins but grapple with reciprocity demands.

Implications for European Higher Education

For EU universities, 'day one' access means immediate bolstering of consortia with top global talent. Collaborations with UK powerhouses like Oxford or Imperial, Swiss ETH Zurich, Canadian Toronto, or Kiwi Auckland amplify outputs—think joint quantum labs or biodiversity genomics.

Risks of exclusion? Diminished diversity in proposals, slower mission achievements, and brain drain to bilateral funds. Positively, it positions Europe as a research superpower, attracting postdocs and startups.

Photo by Trnava University on Unsplash

Challenges and Pathways Forward

Hurdles persist: geopolitical flux (e.g., US tariffs), budget trade-offs, and equity for low-income associated states. Solutions include streamlined ratification via enhanced agreements and observer pre-access.

Next steps: Council endorsements post-May 29, trilogue advances, and stakeholder consultations. Universities advocate transparency to build consensus.

Track association progress on the EC site.

Future Outlook: A Bolder Research Era

If heeded, these demands herald FP10 as Europe's most inclusive programme, leveraging €200+ billion for breakthroughs. Amid funding squeezes, associated partners offer leverage for ambition, ensuring universities—from Lisbon to Helsinki—thrive in global races.

For researchers eyeing EU grants, monitor Council outcomes and prepare hybrid proposals blending national and FP10 funds. This unity signals higher education's resolve to transcend borders for collective progress.