Navigation
- Home
- Philosophy
- International
- Peace efforts
- Poets
- Artists beyond Images
- Culture
- Conferences
- Newsletter
- Links
- Imprint
Report on EU funding of Culture by Pyrrhus Mercouris 2014
REPORT By Pyrrhus Mercouris
Brussels March 2014
Introduction
This report is about specific European funding in 2014 to which organisations can apply to fund cultural projects during this year. That is to say, calls for proposals that are current. The report focuses on just two Programmes:
-
Creative Europe Programme
-
Horizon 2020 Programme.
There are many other funding programmes with all kinds of financial opportunities. For example the European structural and cohesion funds. However, these funds are tied to Member states priorities. Furthermore, some structural funding which is organised through programmes like Interreg are administered by regional offices, rather than directly through Brussels, plus, Interreg which has a very specific regional focus. There are aid programmes to Asia, Africa and Caribbean and Pacific states, however, these too have very specific mandates with limits as to who can apply. This is not the case for Creative Europe and for Horizon 2020.
The report will give a very brief summary of the two programmes, provide links and give suggestions on applying. Plus it will raise the strengths and weaknesses, advantages and disadvantages of the two programmes for applicants.
The information on which this project is based comes from the European Commission’s [EC] website, the Europa Server:
-
Creative Europe Programme: http://ec.europa.eu/culture/creative-europe/
-
Horizon 2020: http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/portal/desktop/en/
A further source of information is based on data taken from two European Commission events that took place in Brussels:
-
The Cultural Forum 2013, 4-6 November 2013
-
Horizon 2020 - Info Day 2014 21 January 2014
Creative Europe Programme [2014-2020]
Creative Europe is a merger of three former funding programmes: (1) Culture Programme; (2) Media Programme and (3) Media Mundus Programme.
The Culture Programme, set up in 2000, funded diverse types of cultural and artistic projects. Some of these would be relatively simple one-year projects with three different organisations coming from three different members states, while others could be much more complex networks of several organisations, at least seven for different members states. Platforms were also funded. These were loose associations with members organisations from all over Europe. Indeed these platforms are actually entities that have been funded through lobbying by the European parliament. They are supposed to represent the cultural sector. Platform included all kinds of diverse cultural organisations including Europanostra, Yehudi Menuhin Foundation, European Writers’ Congress and Culture Action Europe1.
The Cultural program was arguably a failure. It was criticised for being over-complex and hopelessly slow and bureaucratic in terms of funding and managing projects. Applicants who succeeded in getting funding had to wait for an over long time, sometimes months on end, to receive money. Reporting to the EC for further financial instalments was also a complex process and waiting to get the remaining funds could take a very long time. Complaints about the running of the programme eventually made their way to the European parliament’s Committee on Education and Culture. Indeed, so frustrated was the European Parliament [EP] about the dysfunctional Cultural Programme, that the setting up of the Creative Programme was in part motivated by the criticisms coming from the EP.
The Media programme is, strictly speaking, not a cultural or arts programme. It is an industry programme, unlike the Culture Programme which was established under the Treaty’s article on culture. The Media programme was established as far back as 1992 on the basis of industrial, not cultural, articles of the Treaty establishing the Community of the European Union [EU]. This programme aimed to support primarily the distribution of European films, and to a lesser extent TV programmes and multimedia works. Media became a successful programme, in contrast to the Cultural Programme. One of the reasons for Media’s relative success was thanks to its consistency. This was a programme which retained more or less the same application forms, the same priorities and objectives over a fairly long duration (1992-2014). The primary aim of Media was to encourage the distribution of European audio-visual works [feature films, TV series, animation and multimedia works]. The EU identified distribution as a bigger problem than production. Audio-visual works are being made to satisfy small local and domestic markets, for example a film made in Denmark is only seen in Denmark. Media would encourage co-productions which make audio-visual works accessible to a wider European audience and therefore create a single European market for audiovisual works.
The Media Mundus programme was modelled on the successful Media programme and on the successful education programme: Erasmus. However, the aim of this programme was to encourage the showing of European films outside the European Union. This means that distributors could apply to fund the screening of a bundle of European films in festivals taking place in other countries or be shown on TV channels in other countries. This programme was quite short lived. It only became truly operational in 2009 and did not have a chance to establish a reputation.
Serious talk of merging these three programmes began with the financial crisis after 2009. The EC encouraged the setting up of a “platform on cultural and creative industries” in 2008 to assist it in formulating its policies towards culture. This platform comprised of all kinds of organisations representing the contemporary arts and cultural heritage, unions representing artists and copyright collecting societies. However, the principal organisation that lead the platform is Culture Action Europe, one of the “old” platforms funded independently for years by the European Commission. Though the platform advised the EC on how the programme was to be framed, it is now obvious that the EC developed the programme within the context of the worsening economic situation. Having said that, the Commissioner for Culture, Ms Androula Vassiliou has boasted that the merged programme has a nine percent (9%) increase in funding over the previous programmes, meaning it is one of the few funding programmes that has survived the budgetary cuts and indeed has more money than before.
So what is new about Creative Europe?
The most fundamental change is that Creative Europe includes “Creative industries” rather than stay focused on culture. What are these industries? They are not necessarily anything to do with culture. They can include luxury industries like perfume making, and at the recent Innovation Convention [8-9 March 2014], no lesser firm than Galland was held up as an example of a creative enterprise. Others included the winemaker Don Perrion. Indeed, there is no limit to what can be defined as a creative enterprise. Advertising firms, fashion designers, software houses, and any other firm that can with reasonable confidence declare that it creates new products and services can be deemed to be part of the creative industries.
One definition is to declare companies and individuals that depend on copyright as being creative. Copyright law is needed to protect an artistic or creative product.
At the Innovation Convention, it was actually said that the European Commission would announce on 20th March 2014, that cultural and creative industries would be viewed as part of industrial policy, though this announcement was not made. If it had happened, it would have constituted a minor earthquake for culture as it would fall within competition rules, from which it is right now exempt and through this exemption culture is eligible for state aid.
Anther departure from previous funding mechanisms is the setting up of the “cultural and creative sector guarantee fund” (CCSGF) which would be administered by the European Investment Bank’s (EIB). How the fund would function is not all that clear. It will only become operational in 2016. It appears that the EIB wants private sector banks to apply to it for the money. The private banks then lend the money to the culture and creative sector. The beneficiaries include:
-
filmmakers
-
TV producers
-
Multimedia
-
And any other culture and creative sector (theatres, museums, libraries … ).
However, to access the fund you must be a small or medium size enterprise (SME) i.e., be no bigger than 250 employees. It seems NGOs are not eligible. The incentive to the private banks is that the CCSGF will guarantee the bank’s loan by 70%. In other words, the bank will give a loan of which only 30% is its money and the remaining 70% comes from the CCSFG. The loans would be about 2 million Euros. It can be more than this. To get the money the SME has to submit a portfolio of projects. In other words, it has to be more than one film, documentary, TV programme, art exhibition, or some kind of creative venture. Repayment of the loan is dependent on the scale of the portfolio. However, there is a minimum period of 12 months (1 year) and a maximum period of 84 months (7 years). The loan is ‘soft’ (whatever that means). The bank cannot ask for fees or charges. Only interest. The size of the fund is not clear. It is separate from the overall budget of Creative Europe. According to the EC’s website the Creative Europe budget is 1.46 billion euros. The CCSGF would be 750 million Euros and yet in its power point presentation the EC says the fund would be 121 million euros [see presentation the EU Commission made].
A third departure from previous projects is the EC’s desire for applicants to ‘develop audiences’. This is especially so for audio-visual works. By demanding this, we see a significant departure from previous European funding of non commercial projects to commercial and profit driven projects. The EC justifies this approach arguing that culture has to be financially more sustainable and independent of public funding. By focusing on audience development the cultural and creative industries would be engaging with the consumer/customer and satisfying their wants.
The programme in detail.
As already stated, the Creative Europe programme tries to do the work of three former programmes: Cultural Programme, Media Programme and Media Mundus. These three programmes were themselves sub-divided into sub-programmes, called ‘strands’ or ‘budget-lines’. The new programme retains these strands.
The best funded part of the programme is Media and it sub-strands. According to the EC, 56% of the budget will go to funding the audio-visual sector. Fundamentally, Creative Europe has retained the old Media programme structure. Indeed, the dismantling of Media programme was an unpopular act and criticised by audio-visual professionals, so retaining its structure in the new programme has to some extent been a response to this criticism. The sub strands include:
-
Training. This includes funding diverse training programmes, including scriptwriting and script development. To apply you do not necessarily need to have partners, an individual training organisation can apply; however, the training course needs to be attractive to audio-visual professionals from all over Europe and an applicant has to prove this.
-
Development. This strand will enable producers to develop film, documentary and also multimedia projects which include computer games. Computer games are new, before they could not have been supported, but computer games are now seen an important ‘creative industry’. Yet funding for this kind of development is quite modest. Only co-productions can be supported, meaning three partners from three different member states.
-
Distribution. This is the best funded and most important part of the Media strand. Europe has many production companies and important television broadcasters who all make films. But the European film market is fragmented. For example, Portuguese seldom if ever watch Danish films. Films, if they are to be supported, need to show that they are “European”, meaning they must be co-productions and show that they have a distribution plan.
-
Audience development. This is a new strand. The EC wants producers to engage with ‘fans’ and make movies which the fans want to see. In this way, the EC believes European film-makers will start making movies that have a stronger commercial base and thus are financially sustainable and which can become in the long term less dependent upon state aid. This strand has been criticized by film-makers who complain that what makes a successful film is unknown, while trying to compete with Hollywood is ridiculous as the eight studios in America can generate vast funds to make a film. Europe’s strength in film-making stems from the diverse nature of the market and therefore trying to negate its fragmented nature should not be a priority. More funding for distribution which would include sub-titling, dubbing, exploiting Internet possibilities, etc. would have been more desirable.
-
Festivals. The Media programme has funded festivals from its first inception. This has also been expanded to widen market access for European films outside the EU.
Funding varies. For training projects and festivals, funds seldom exceed 80,000 Euros. Usually it is less. For development and distribution projects, funding is much more generous and can go into the hundreds of thousands.
Concerning the second part of the programme, the funding of cultural projects [31% of the budget], this too is subdivided into several sub-strands:
-
Networks. They are to be funded for three to four years and can apply for as much as 750,000 Euros. The maximum annual grant amount will not exceed EUR 250 000 and 80% of the total eligible costs of the project for that year. Networks shall consist of at least 15 member organisations (legal persons) and be legally established in at least 10 different countries. A network should aim to strengthen the operation capacity of its member organisations to carry out cultural and artistic activities and events across borders.
-
Platforms. New platforms are to be funded which “…. showcase emerging talent and stimulate Europe-wide programming of cultural and artistic activities”. The maximum amount request cannot exceed 500,000 Euros and cannot in any case exceed 80%. Platforms should have 14 organisations.
-
European Co-operation Projects. These have similar aims and objectives as networks, that is to strengthen capacity of the culture and creative sectors to carry out cross border activities. Two types of projects can be funded. The ‘small’ project which can be funded up to 200,000 Euros and the ‘big’ project which can be funded up to 2 million Euros.
-
Translation. This is open to publishers who can apply to have a contemporary literary work translated. The sums are modest and seldom exceed 30,000 Euros. There is a preference to translate books written in lesser known languages into more widely spoken languages. Though this is not a strict criteria at all.
A key justification for the funding of platforms and networks is to enhance the mobility of artists and heritage professionals. The European Commission is keenly aware of the need to develop a single market and justifies the funding of the arts and heritage at a European level as enabling the sector to overcome the obstacle of mobility and thereby move towards the ability to maximise the benefits of the single market.
-
The cross-sectorial strand [13% of the budget]. This funds several activities. It funds prizes: Europe's emerging authors of fiction; the excellence of European architecture; outstanding examples of cultural heritage care; emerging talents in pop, rock and dance music; and, the best European films. Prize money is usually set at 25,000 Euros. Also funded is the European Heritage Label. This was something the European Parliament wanted. Added also to the programme is the funding of the European Capitals of Culture. Funding for this was 300,000 Euros, but may increase. This last action is viewed as an emblematic action and is considered a great success which gives the European Union a high profile visibility.
On applying.
The application process is complex. One needs to submit an electronic form provided by the Commission. Currently, in the first call, the e-form has proven hopelessly unreliable. Just accessing it means getting login, passwords and pin numbers. Alas, the e-form until mid February at least did not work well. Though later it did start to function. Having said that the deadline for some calls was actually late February.
Applicants need to send all kinds of extra data including CVs of staff, budgetary information and most demanding of all a new independent audit specific to the application. Depending in which country you are in, an independent audit can be very expensive. For example, in the UK this could be as much as five thousand pounds [a bit less than six thousand Euros]. In Greece an independent audit requires that you get first a certificate from the tax office, and as this is a lengthy procedure, it can take many weeks, if not months. This criterion would make it difficult for small NGOs and SMEs to apply.
The first call for proposals was launched on 5 December 2013. In some cases the call is still valid.
|
FIRST CALLS FOR PROPOSALS PUBLISHED UNDER CREATIVE EUROPE! The first Calls for Proposals under Creative Europe are now online. A general overview is available here while a link to each individual call is provided here below. Culture Sub-programme
MEDIA Sub-programme
Organisation and implementation of an annual European Union Prize for rock, pop and dance music Call for proposals EAC/S04/2013 (deadline: 31st January 2014) Organisation and implementation of an annual European Union Prize for Literature (EUPL) Call for proposals EAC/S12/2013 (deadline: 21 February 2014)
|
FUNDED PROJECTS
Pilot Project for a European Platform for Festivals in the field of culture Selected project ...
EVENTS WINNERS OF THE EUROPEAN FILM AWARDS 2013
EBBA – EUROPEAN BORDER BREAKERS AWARDS CEREMONY - 15 JANUARY 2014 European Culture Forum 2013: The European Union rendezvous for culture! Award ceremony celebrating the winners of the 2013 European Union Prize for Literature Marseille-Provence 2013 celebrates its success as European Capital of Culture!
LATEST NEWS 'European Film Awards' nominations 2013 Commission adopts new film support rules Four Bulgarian cities short-listed for European Capital of Culture 2019 European Year of Citizens 2013 Copyright –Commission launches public consultation 29/30 January 2014 – Committee of the Regions' conference on cultural and creative sectors
On can contact the EC directly2 and ask about these calls for proposals, or one can contact the « Contact Point » in you country [http://ec.europa.eu/culture/annexes-culture/doc1232_en.htm]. |
Horizon 2020 Programme [H2020].
Introduction
Horizon 2020 follows up for the Seventh Framework Programme for Research and Technological Development [FP7]. FP7 as its names suggests, is the seventh framework programme. In other words H2020 follows on from a long line of programmes of the European Commission. A ‘framework programme’ bundles and brings together diverse related programmes and also diverse European objectives and aims. The key factor in these programmes, which include H2020 is focus on research and developing new technologies. The budget has been increased from 70 billion euros to 80 billion euros. To justify an increase in budget during a time of austerity, the H2020 is presented as a strategic element towards meeting the goals of the Europe 2020 strategy [http://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/index_en.htm]3; which is all about maximising the benefits of digital technologies and the information revolution. Indeed, it is a continuation of the Lisbon Strategy which aims to turn the European Union [EU] into the most dynamic knowledge based economy in the world. This policy has permeated many funding programmes, for example the Creative Europe Programme. Any project that is not using or contributing to the information society is unlikely to be funded.
Anther aim of H2020 is to contribute to the European Research Area [ERA]. ERA is a concept that pre-dates the Lisbon Agenda and Europe 2020. Essentially, it wants European research institutions and companies carrying out research to combine efforts and to maximise the benefits of the research and to develop synergies. It also infers supporting networks of research excellence. It defines the framework programmes and also H2020. Projects should comprise ‘networks’ or partnership that involved research organisations from as many countries as possible. Indeed, H2020 favours large projects with many partners. This has been seen as unfair to small countries like Greece and Cyprus, where the bulk of firms are small and research organisations have modest resources. Consequently, a special funding line for small and medium size enterprises [SMEs] was developed in FP7 and this is to be carried over in H20204. The criterion to need to have ‘partners’ is greatly relaxed. The key programme in H2020 for SMEs is the Competitiveness of Enterprises and SMEs (COSME) will run from 2014 to 2020, with a planned budget of EUR 2.3bn. Its aim is to « . facilitate SME access to finance, create supportive environment for business creation, help small businesses operate outside their home countries and improve their access to markets ».
[More on COSME below]
Horizon 2020, European Union FrameworkProgramme for Researchand Innovation [2014-2020]:
What’s in it for culture?
The budget related to research and innovation, will not be cut. It represents about 10% of the total EU budget.
Horizon 2020 has three pillars:
-
excellent science
-
industrial leadership
-
social challenges
Under
Pillar 1: it is important to stress the category: “excellent science” which includes humanities and social sciences, and contemporary culture and cultural heritage could find opportunities here. It includes the Marie Currie initiative which is to support individual researchers.
Pillar 2 – there is a sub-heading which specifically mentioned the cultural heritage. Energy strategies would include use of historic buildings.
Pillar 3 - Culture is found in ‘social challenges’. This pillar includes all kinds of topics, like health, energy, transport, environment, etc. However, cultural heritage is a sub-category of many of these [e.g., under energy and under environment]. Inclusive and innovative and reflective societies is a category that the culture sector could make use.
These “pillars” set out to solve various “challenges”. In terms of culture the focus seems to be on cultural heritage. This includes researching into the ‘challenges’ confronted by heritage – the sites and monuments, but also artefacts and exhibits. Indeed, this is scattered all over the Horizon 2020. Digital cultural heritage has been worked on by many member states, who have digitised collections, seems they are not sure what to do with these digitised images.
On ‘creative industries’ H2020 is not clear at all.
There are examples of research projects that have investigated culture:
-
regions and cultural identity
-
effects of war on European cultural identity
-
culture and external and economic ties
Who can apply:
-
any organisation can apply – You need to show you have a research background, or you will not be considered.
ANNEX 3 gives a detailed account on a specific on Pillar 3 - Societal Challenge Horizon, with information on how to apply.
Creative Industries in COSME, Programme for the Competitiveness of enterprises and SMEs [2014-2020]5
Funding of COSME [2.3 billion euros]: this funding programme is trying to help SMEs deal with red tap, complexities of laws, assist them in exporting and encouraging workers to consider self-employment. 60% of one’s project budget would be funded by COSME. Areas eligible: include improving an SMEs competitiveness and entrepreneurship.
Equity facility for growth for SMEs – this fund is not for start ups, but for the growth of an SME.
-
Loans for all types of SMES. Not much more than 200,000 euros can be applied for.
-
Only a small amount of money is grants.
-
Access to market – this is part of the “enterprise Europe network” and this provides a service, like the China IPR help desk.
-
Improving and reducing that administrative burden
-
Stimulate new business models – this is specific to consumer industries. Support to clusters in included and regional development funds can also be accessed. Tourism and fashion goods can benefit from this.
Fashion and consumer goods – footwear, textiles, clothes, jewellery, and all kinds of sectors relating to design – unfortunately, SMEs have difficulty in being competent in design, and competing. The growth of SMEs, is neglected. COSME focuses on growing and developing SMEs, rather then supporting start ups.
-
Target audience is the creative and design industry. This action complements Creative Europe Programme and work done by DG Connect. Synergies between tourism and fashion vis a vis cultural events like festival is sought. The budget is tiny, 73 million euros. The aim is to push through “market replication projects” which close the gap between R&D and market exploitation, and this means up take of new business models. Secondly, soft measures, which is closing the gap between design and manufacture. SMEs often are sub-contractors to big firms and cannot manufacture and design – i.e., they cannot do both. The bulk of the 73 million euros goes to replication project. This part of the programme will start in 2015.
-
For the soft side of will include the bulk of the 2.2 billion euros. Only two calls for proposals. This will be part of the WORTH Funding Project
-
“Worth funding project”: this will last 24 months. It is a mechanism to be managed by an outside firm and it will first be tested first, meaning the call for proposals is delayed to 2016. Basically, the EC wants to set up a platform between designers and manufacturers of SMEs from different countries working together, to create better fashion and designed goods. The platform will showcase partners’ products and therefore enable them to further showcase their products at trade fairs. Arts and crafts and micro firms could also benefit. The Worth funding project wants to support products that have a significant design and creative process before going to manufacture. Developing trans-national network of SMEs in design and manufacture is the goal. Designers must have experience and have at least experience in two fashion seasons [spring and autumn].
-
Call for tender to manage the Worth Funding Project is over, and hopefully a firm to manage the project will be selected by the end of the year.
Some interesting points about COSME:
-
Can immigrant SMEs apply? COSME targets SMES in the growth phases, and not start-ups, so a start-up business run by immigrants, could get money for growth, not for start up.
-
What is the interest on the loans? On loans, he is not sure at all what the interest rate on the loans would be.
-
Can product designers apply? Product designers are eligible, provided the design is not technical or eco, COSME would cover furniture design but not the design of a component of a refrigerator.
-
What kind of audio-visual SMEs can apply to get better access to the market? Such a sector would probably be funded elsewhere by DG EAC [i.e., the Creative Europe Programme]. However, there could be opportunities in COSME if the project is designed to meet its criteria.
-
Can non-EU countries participate, namely former Yugoslavia? The answer is that all countries that contribute to the COSME budget, that include Bosnia and Serbia, and even some Mediterranean countries.
-
Market replication – does this include developing and applying business models? The answer is support will go to customisation of the research and the products the research has created. If you are still in development stage then you go to HORIZON 2020.
-
What concrete measures does COSME have to enhance exports? In this regard the programme has limited means, plus you cannot force a firm to export, the most it will do is exchange good practices, support workshop and seminars. Plus ‘mapping’ of the business support facilities of all member states, i.e., simply knowing and promoting what member states are doing abroad.
Conclusion
Having examined the funding opportunities of Creative Europe and Horizon 2020, especially COSME, it would seem that H2020 is a much better funding programme. The application procedure of H2020 is also complex, but the balance is much better and there are more opportunities for SMEs. The information on Creative Europe is also muddled, as can be seen by different contradictory information on the CCSGF. The main limitation on H2020 is that projects must focus on research, you need to have research institutions or firms that are large. The partnerships would complex. Funding could be several millions .
1 The legality of funding this ‘platforms’ has often been questioned. Initially they were funded through administrative funds left idle and these funds were then spent by the EC at the insistence of the European Parliament on these ‘platforms’. Culture Progamme then gave a certain ‘legality’ and these platforms had to apply and have always been successful. Now with Creative Europe, their funding is less clear.
2 Ms Dorota Nigge, Policy Officer, European Commission - Directorate-General for Education and Culture, Culture. policy and intercultural dialogue Unit;
3 «Europe 2020 is the EU's growth strategy for the coming decade. In a changing world, we want the EU to become a smart, sustainable and inclusive economy. These three mutually reinforcing priorities should help the EU and the Member States deliver high levels of employment, productivity and social cohesion. Concretely, the Union has set five ambitious objectives - on employment, innovation, education, social inclusion and climate/energy - to be reached by 2020. Each Member State has adopted its own national targets in each of these areas. Concrete actions at EU and national levels underpin the strategy ». EC Europe 2020 website [home page].
4 See http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/portal/desktop/en/funding/sme_participation.html. An SME should not be more than 250 employees. In many small EU countries, firms this size would be considered to be large.
5Contact : Mr. Julio Cardoso, Policy Officer, European Commission - Directorate-General for Enterprise and Industry, Textiles, Fashion, Design and Creative Industries Unit
« Initial Proposals for Creative Europe 2014 - 2020 | Discussion about Creative Europe programme (2014) »