Impact of Collaborative Research
The event was kicked off by moderator Marcel de Heide (Lead Economist at TNO) with an explanation of TNO’s value creation model. This model explores the effects of research & development (R&D), monitoring different stages of the innovation process. It includes five phases: input, activities, output, outcome and impact. In the public debate, there is a lot of emphasis on the outcome and impact of collaborative research – often using it to ‘justify’ research funding. However, in reality it is often difficult to capture only the outcome and impact. Value also gets created in different ways during the other parts of the model. De Heide introduced that two testimonials will showcase various ways in which collaborative research can have ‘impact’. Testimonials from VoltaChem and Radar presented the challenges they faced in different stages of the innovation process. They did this to outline insights on the different effects of collaborative research. During both testimonials, TNO was joined by their industry partners to present their testimonials. After each presentation, a reflection was given from the speakers of the Commission.
Testimonial 1: VoltaChem – Decarbonising Industry with Hydrogen and Power-2-X
The first testimonial on VoltaChem was introduced by Martijn de Graaff (Program Director VoltaChem). VoltaChem is an Innovation Programme, powered by TNO, that connects the electricity sector, equipment sector, and chemical industry. New technologies and business models are developed and implemented together that focus on the use of renewable energy in the production of hydrogen and chemicals. De Graaff explained how in this field, working independently lacks speed in an increasingly competitive world. This is why he advocates for market and policy collaboration, value chain collaboration and technology collaboration. Afterwards Eugene McKenna (Senior VP Hydrogen and Sustainable Technologies, Johnson Matthey) explained the questions industry must take into account when engaging in R&D: How do you spend your money? What can we do on our own? What do we do with our partners? How do you deal with bumps in the road? He advocated that for this, a mutual understanding of the long-term vision from all participants is crucial. It was highlighted that measuring impact of collaborative research can take a great deal of time, even sometimes up to decades. In that way, Johnson Matthey collaborated with TNO within the VoltaChem Programme. McKenna also noted that collaboration often becomes too complex with too many partners and that within smaller consortia it is easier to find a mutual goal.
Reflections by DG RTD
In a first reflection Jan-Tjibbe Steeman (Policy Officer and Economic Analyst, DG RTD) noted that for the last while, collaborative research has been highly scrutinized: outcome and impact is often determined by how much money a project generates, without considering the knowledge and other less tangible outcomes that flow out of it. It is, thus, important to really pinpoint how we can use the various outcomes in a general way, to show the public and policy makers the value of collaborative research. Steeman notes that examples like VoltaChem, that have received funding from the EU, are crucial to show this added value. Twan van Erp (Assistant to Director Clean Planet Directorate, DG RTD) reflected how the projects within VoltaChem are aligned with efforts by the European Commission. There is a lot of potential within hydrogen and the Commission is investing it through, for example, the Clean Hydrogen Joint Undertaking.
Testimonial 2: Radar Technology for Security and Defence
In the second testimonial, Raymond van Dijk (System Designer, TNO) and Simon van den Berg, (Technical Innovation Director, Thales Nederland) presented their radar technology, developed in collaboration with the Dutch Ministry of Defence. With their radar technology, different entities – from aircrafts to satellites – can be tracked over a large area, beyond the borders of multiple countries. Thales and TNO have been working together on this technology for decades. They even established ‘Platform Nederland Radarland’ (English: Platform Netherlands Radarcountry) for this collaboration in 2002. For the development of radar technology, they found starting out with larger consortia at the early phases of research can have great benefits since you get multiple actors offering their unique perspective on the same problem. However, during the later stages it becomes more realistic to work in smaller consortia. With their research, they also found that even imperfect outcomes would often lead to new collaborative projects that helped further develop the radar technology. Van Dijk found that for industry, it is often most interesting to jump when the project gets to a higher TRL level. Just as for the first testimonial, the importance of a shared vision was highlighted. Van Dijk and Van den Berg specifically noted that due to this shared vision, there was no sense of competition between partners – making collaborating easier and more efficient. Van Dijk also noted that European collaboration is specifically important as it gives companies a clear context to cooperate in as collaborators and not as competitors.
Reflection by DG DEFIS and DG RTD
Ignacio Montiel-Sanchez (Policy Officer Information Technology , DG DEFIS) offered the first reflection on the second testimonial. He pointed out that in terms of defense, it is sometimes difficult to prove the importance of collaborative R&I at the EU level since it is a national competence. Companies from different countries can often see each other as competitors because of this and seem less likely to collaborate. The case of the testimonial is, therefore, a great example of how collaboration can happen without competition. Paul Kruis (Policy Officer EDF and SMEs, DG DEFIS) added that the search for a long-term strategy is often a big challenge. To establish this, it is important to maintain commitment from the end-user and the companies involved. It is often difficult to stimulate collaborative research and get projects to a further stadium to build competitiveness because companies see each other as competitors. In this project that competition was not felt. In a final reflection Steeman once again highlighted that stories such as this can help bring research closer to the European citizens: our security is something that affects us all.
Key Reflections
To close of the event, a few key reflections were made. First, in the lower TRL stages it is interesting to collaborate within bigger consortia, since it allows various perspectives to reflect on the same problem. However, as you move along the TRL scale, it is more manageable to perform collaborative research with smaller consortia, since this allows you to create sharper, shared long-term visions together. The importance of such a shared vision was the second key lesson. Third, as research takes time, we need to move away from short-termed thinking: research projects and funding for these projects need to take the long trajectory from idea to market into account. Lastly, in order for research and innovation to really thrive, barriers must go down: from administrative barriers to barriers from the incomplete single market. When these barriers are removed, research funding will also work more efficiently. The hope that future Acts such as the European Research Area Act and the Innovation Act will remove these barriers was proclaimed.
Context
Neth-ER's event ‘From Idea to Market: Impact of Collaborative Research in Europe’, organized with TNO, took place on 4 September 2025. The event showcased how public-private partnerships, strong ecosystems, and European collaboration enable research to evolve into valuable industrial applications and societal benefits. The audience consisted of representatives from the European Parliament, Commission officials and European stakeholder organisations.
Mede geschreven door Laura van der Vleuten.
