PURPOSE: Commission Communication on a strategy to\nmeet the regulatory and technical challenges of the online gambling\nsector.
\nCONTENT: online gambling is a fast growing service\nactivity in the EU, with annual growth rates of almost 15% and\nestimated annual revenues in 2015 in the region of EUR 13 billion,\ncompared to EUR 9.3 billion in 2011. This would represent a total\ngrowth rate of almost 40%. It is estimated that about 6.84 million\nEuropean consumers participate in online gambling.
\nThe nature of the online environment means that\ngambling sites may operate in the EU, outside any form of control\ncarried out by regulators within the EU. Consumers in Europe also\nsearch across borders for online gambling services which, if not\nproperly regulated, may expose them to significant risks. The\nextensive range of offers and the rising level of demand for online\ngambling services pose a number of challenges when it comes to\nensuring the proper implementation of public policy objectives at\nthe national, EU and international level.
\nFollowing the Commission Green Paper in\n2011 and the European Parliament\nresolution on online gambling in the internal\nmarket, this Communication identifies the key challenges posed by\nthe co-existence of national regulatory frameworks within the\ninternal market. It also seeks to propose answers to these\nchallenges in the form of actions to be taken both at the national\nand EU level.
\nThe paper points out that while Member States are in\nprinciple free to set the objectives of their policy on games of\nchance and to define in detail the level of protection sought,\nnational regulatory frameworks have to comply with EU law and\ninternal market rules. Ensuring compliance of national law with the\nTreaty is therefore essential to a successful EU policy on online\ngambling. In view of the type of challenges posed by the\ndevelopment of online gambling and their implications for each\nMember State, it is not possible for Member States effectively to\naddress these challenges alone and to provide individually a\nproperly regulated and sufficiently safe offer of online gambling\nservices.
\nThe Communication proposes a combination of\ninitiatives and measures covering a range of issues, seeking to\nenhance legal clarity and establish policies based on available\nevidence. These actions, fully taking into account the principles\nof subsidiarity and proportionality, highlight five priority areas\nto address the challenges in the EU.
\n(1) Compliance of national regulatory frameworks with\nEU law: online gambling regulation in\nMember States is characterised by a diversity of regulatory\nframeworks. Recent regulatory changes in Member States have led to\nan increase in the offer of gambling services by operators\nauthorised in an EU Member State over the last few years and to\nconsiderable differences in national regulations. Furthermore,\ncross-border offers are often not authorised under national\nrules in the recipient Member State.
\nCompliance of these national rules with the Treaty has\nbeen challenged in front of national 6 courts and questions on the\ninterpretation of EU law have been referred to the European Court\nof Justice (ECJ). The ECJ has confirmed that national rules that\nprohibit the provision of gambling services authorised in other\nMember States were found to restrict the freedom of national\nresidents to receive, over the internet, services offered in other\nMember States. They also restrict the freedom of operators\nestablished in other Member States to provide gambling\nservices.
\nThe national rules in question focus mainly on\nconsumer protection objectives, in particular the prevention of\nproblem gambling and the protection of minors, and on crime and\nfraud prevention. While Member States usually offer legitimate\nreasons for the restriction of cross border gambling services, they\nmust nonetheless demonstrate the necessity of the measure in\nquestion, in particular the existence of a problem linked to the\npublic interest objective at stake and the consistency of the\nregulatory system.
\nThe Commission has launched infringement cases\nagainst a significant number of Member States, and will accelerate\nits assessment of national provisions in the pending infringements\ncases and complaints and take enforcement action wherever\nnecessary.
\n(2) Enhancing administrative cooperation and efficient\nenforcement: enhancing administrative\ncooperation will assist Member States and gambling regulators in\ntheir regulatory and supervisory role and improve the quality of\ntheir work. Practical cooperation will enable Member States to\nbecome familiar with the systems of others, and to develop closer\nworking relations at the operational level.
\nThe Commission will:
\nMember States are urged to:
\n(3) Protecting consumers and citizens, minors and\nvulnerable groups: appropriate action\nin the EU is needed so as to: (i) draw consumers away from\nunregulated and potentially harmful offers; (ii) protect minors\nfrom accessing gambling facilities, recalling that the protection\nof minors must be a priority not least because 75% of 6-17 year\nolds in Europe use the internet; (iii) safeguard other vulnerable\ngroups and (iv) prevent the development of gambling-related\ndisorders, since it can be estimated that between 0.5-3% of the\npopulation in the EU suffer from some type of gambling\ndisorder.
\nThe paper notes also that responsible advertising is\nimperative in order to ensure that citizens are aware\nthat:
\nAs a first step the Commission will prepare a\nRecommendation on common protection of consumers, which\nshould include a set of principles including effective and\nefficient registration of players, age verification and\nidentification controls – in particular in the context of\nmoney transactions, reality checks (account activity, warning\nsigns, signposting to helplines), no credit policy, protection of\nplayer funds, self-restriction possibilities (time/financial\nlimits, exclusion) as well as customer support and efficient\nhandling of complaints.
\nThe Commission will also prepare a Recommendation\non responsible gambling advertising in 2013 to ensure that\noperators authorised in a given Member State advertise gambling in\na socially responsible manner and provide key information to\nconsumers.
\nThe Commission will, inter alia:
\nMember States are urged to:
\n(4) Preventing fraud and money\nlaundering: the main public interest\nobjectives of Member States with regard to public order are the\nprevention of gambling fraud and money laundering. Credit card\nfraud and theft of banking credentials are reported to be the most\ncommon crime in relation to on-line gambling. Online gambling may\nalso be used for laundering of funds stemming from illegal\nactivities. These criminal offences are often committed\ncross-border and involve organised crime.
\nThe Commission will:
\n(5) Safeguarding the integrity of sports and\npreventing match-fixing: betting\nrelated match fixing is a specific type of fraud that goes against\nthe interests of sport organisations, sportspeople, players\n(consumers) and regulated gambling operators. The Commission will\ndevelop a Recommendation anti-match fixing measures with a\nview to:
\nThe Commission will also:
\nMember States are urged to:
\nLastly, the Commission will publish a report within\ntwo years, assessing these actions, notably with regard to the\nobjectives of a more effective protection of consumers and\ndeterrence of match-fixing. It will also assess whether these\nactions provide an adequate EU framework for online gambling or if\nadditional measures, where necessary legislative ones, need to be\ntaken at EU level.
\nPURPOSE: Commission Communication on a strategy to\nmeet the regulatory and technical challenges of the online gambling\nsector.
\nCONTENT: online gambling is a fast growing service\nactivity in the EU, with annual growth rates of almost 15% and\nestimated annual revenues in 2015 in the region of EUR 13 billion,\ncompared to EUR 9.3 billion in 2011. This would represent a total\ngrowth rate of almost 40%. It is estimated that about 6.84 million\nEuropean consumers participate in online gambling.
\nThe nature of the online environment means that\ngambling sites may operate in the EU, outside any form of control\ncarried out by regulators within the EU. Consumers in Europe also\nsearch across borders for online gambling services which, if not\nproperly regulated, may expose them to significant risks. The\nextensive range of offers and the rising level of demand for online\ngambling services pose a number of challenges when it comes to\nensuring the proper implementation of public policy objectives at\nthe national, EU and international level.
\nFollowing the Commission Green Paper in\n2011 and the European Parliament\nresolution on online gambling in the internal\nmarket, this Communication identifies the key challenges posed by\nthe co-existence of national regulatory frameworks within the\ninternal market. It also seeks to propose answers to these\nchallenges in the form of actions to be taken both at the national\nand EU level.
\nThe paper points out that while Member States are in\nprinciple free to set the objectives of their policy on games of\nchance and to define in detail the level of protection sought,\nnational regulatory frameworks have to comply with EU law and\ninternal market rules. Ensuring compliance of national law with the\nTreaty is therefore essential to a successful EU policy on online\ngambling. In view of the type of challenges posed by the\ndevelopment of online gambling and their implications for each\nMember State, it is not possible for Member States effectively to\naddress these challenges alone and to provide individually a\nproperly regulated and sufficiently safe offer of online gambling\nservices.
\nThe Communication proposes a combination of\ninitiatives and measures covering a range of issues, seeking to\nenhance legal clarity and establish policies based on available\nevidence. These actions, fully taking into account the principles\nof subsidiarity and proportionality, highlight five priority areas\nto address the challenges in the EU.
\n(1) Compliance of national regulatory frameworks with\nEU law: online gambling regulation in\nMember States is characterised by a diversity of regulatory\nframeworks. Recent regulatory changes in Member States have led to\nan increase in the offer of gambling services by operators\nauthorised in an EU Member State over the last few years and to\nconsiderable differences in national regulations. Furthermore,\ncross-border offers are often not authorised under national\nrules in the recipient Member State.
\nCompliance of these national rules with the Treaty has\nbeen challenged in front of national 6 courts and questions on the\ninterpretation of EU law have been referred to the European Court\nof Justice (ECJ). The ECJ has confirmed that national rules that\nprohibit the provision of gambling services authorised in other\nMember States were found to restrict the freedom of national\nresidents to receive, over the internet, services offered in other\nMember States. They also restrict the freedom of operators\nestablished in other Member States to provide gambling\nservices.
\nThe national rules in question focus mainly on\nconsumer protection objectives, in particular the prevention of\nproblem gambling and the protection of minors, and on crime and\nfraud prevention. While Member States usually offer legitimate\nreasons for the restriction of cross border gambling services, they\nmust nonetheless demonstrate the necessity of the measure in\nquestion, in particular the existence of a problem linked to the\npublic interest objective at stake and the consistency of the\nregulatory system.
\nThe Commission has launched infringement cases\nagainst a significant number of Member States, and will accelerate\nits assessment of national provisions in the pending infringements\ncases and complaints and take enforcement action wherever\nnecessary.
\n(2) Enhancing administrative cooperation and efficient\nenforcement: enhancing administrative\ncooperation will assist Member States and gambling regulators in\ntheir regulatory and supervisory role and improve the quality of\ntheir work. Practical cooperation will enable Member States to\nbecome familiar with the systems of others, and to develop closer\nworking relations at the operational level.
\nThe Commission will:
\nMember States are urged to:
\n(3) Protecting consumers and citizens, minors and\nvulnerable groups: appropriate action\nin the EU is needed so as to: (i) draw consumers away from\nunregulated and potentially harmful offers; (ii) protect minors\nfrom accessing gambling facilities, recalling that the protection\nof minors must be a priority not least because 75% of 6-17 year\nolds in Europe use the internet; (iii) safeguard other vulnerable\ngroups and (iv) prevent the development of gambling-related\ndisorders, since it can be estimated that between 0.5-3% of the\npopulation in the EU suffer from some type of gambling\ndisorder.
\nThe paper notes also that responsible advertising is\nimperative in order to ensure that citizens are aware\nthat:
\nAs a first step the Commission will prepare a\nRecommendation on common protection of consumers, which\nshould include a set of principles including effective and\nefficient registration of players, age verification and\nidentification controls – in particular in the context of\nmoney transactions, reality checks (account activity, warning\nsigns, signposting to helplines), no credit policy, protection of\nplayer funds, self-restriction possibilities (time/financial\nlimits, exclusion) as well as customer support and efficient\nhandling of complaints.
\nThe Commission will also prepare a Recommendation\non responsible gambling advertising in 2013 to ensure that\noperators authorised in a given Member State advertise gambling in\na socially responsible manner and provide key information to\nconsumers.
\nThe Commission will, inter alia:
\nMember States are urged to:
\n(4) Preventing fraud and money\nlaundering: the main public interest\nobjectives of Member States with regard to public order are the\nprevention of gambling fraud and money laundering. Credit card\nfraud and theft of banking credentials are reported to be the most\ncommon crime in relation to on-line gambling. Online gambling may\nalso be used for laundering of funds stemming from illegal\nactivities. These criminal offences are often committed\ncross-border and involve organised crime.
\nThe Commission will:
\n(5) Safeguarding the integrity of sports and\npreventing match-fixing: betting\nrelated match fixing is a specific type of fraud that goes against\nthe interests of sport organisations, sportspeople, players\n(consumers) and regulated gambling operators. The Commission will\ndevelop a Recommendation anti-match fixing measures with a\nview to:
\nThe Commission will also:
\nMember States are urged to:
\nLastly, the Commission will publish a report within\ntwo years, assessing these actions, notably with regard to the\nobjectives of a more effective protection of consumers and\ndeterrence of match-fixing. It will also assess whether these\nactions provide an adequate EU framework for online gambling or if\nadditional measures, where necessary legislative ones, need to be\ntaken at EU level.
\nPURPOSE: Commission Communication on a strategy to\nmeet the regulatory and technical challenges of the online gambling\nsector.
\nCONTENT: online gambling is a fast growing service\nactivity in the EU, with annual growth rates of almost 15% and\nestimated annual revenues in 2015 in the region of EUR 13 billion,\ncompared to EUR 9.3 billion in 2011. This would represent a total\ngrowth rate of almost 40%. It is estimated that about 6.84 million\nEuropean consumers participate in online gambling.
\nThe nature of the online environment means that\ngambling sites may operate in the EU, outside any form of control\ncarried out by regulators within the EU. Consumers in Europe also\nsearch across borders for online gambling services which, if not\nproperly regulated, may expose them to significant risks. The\nextensive range of offers and the rising level of demand for online\ngambling services pose a number of challenges when it comes to\nensuring the proper implementation of public policy objectives at\nthe national, EU and international level.
\nFollowing the Commission Green Paper in\n2011 and the European Parliament\nresolution on online gambling in the internal\nmarket, this Communication identifies the key challenges posed by\nthe co-existence of national regulatory frameworks within the\ninternal market. It also seeks to propose answers to these\nchallenges in the form of actions to be taken both at the national\nand EU level.
\nThe paper points out that while Member States are in\nprinciple free to set the objectives of their policy on games of\nchance and to define in detail the level of protection sought,\nnational regulatory frameworks have to comply with EU law and\ninternal market rules. Ensuring compliance of national law with the\nTreaty is therefore essential to a successful EU policy on online\ngambling. In view of the type of challenges posed by the\ndevelopment of online gambling and their implications for each\nMember State, it is not possible for Member States effectively to\naddress these challenges alone and to provide individually a\nproperly regulated and sufficiently safe offer of online gambling\nservices.
\nThe Communication proposes a combination of\ninitiatives and measures covering a range of issues, seeking to\nenhance legal clarity and establish policies based on available\nevidence. These actions, fully taking into account the principles\nof subsidiarity and proportionality, highlight five priority areas\nto address the challenges in the EU.
\n(1) Compliance of national regulatory frameworks with\nEU law: online gambling regulation in\nMember States is characterised by a diversity of regulatory\nframeworks. Recent regulatory changes in Member States have led to\nan increase in the offer of gambling services by operators\nauthorised in an EU Member State over the last few years and to\nconsiderable differences in national regulations. Furthermore,\ncross-border offers are often not authorised under national\nrules in the recipient Member State.
\nCompliance of these national rules with the Treaty has\nbeen challenged in front of national 6 courts and questions on the\ninterpretation of EU law have been referred to the European Court\nof Justice (ECJ). The ECJ has confirmed that national rules that\nprohibit the provision of gambling services authorised in other\nMember States were found to restrict the freedom of national\nresidents to receive, over the internet, services offered in other\nMember States. They also restrict the freedom of operators\nestablished in other Member States to provide gambling\nservices.
\nThe national rules in question focus mainly on\nconsumer protection objectives, in particular the prevention of\nproblem gambling and the protection of minors, and on crime and\nfraud prevention. While Member States usually offer legitimate\nreasons for the restriction of cross border gambling services, they\nmust nonetheless demonstrate the necessity of the measure in\nquestion, in particular the existence of a problem linked to the\npublic interest objective at stake and the consistency of the\nregulatory system.
\nThe Commission has launched infringement cases\nagainst a significant number of Member States, and will accelerate\nits assessment of national provisions in the pending infringements\ncases and complaints and take enforcement action wherever\nnecessary.
\n(2) Enhancing administrative cooperation and efficient\nenforcement: enhancing administrative\ncooperation will assist Member States and gambling regulators in\ntheir regulatory and supervisory role and improve the quality of\ntheir work. Practical cooperation will enable Member States to\nbecome familiar with the systems of others, and to develop closer\nworking relations at the operational level.
\nThe Commission will:
\nMember States are urged to:
\n(3) Protecting consumers and citizens, minors and\nvulnerable groups: appropriate action\nin the EU is needed so as to: (i) draw consumers away from\nunregulated and potentially harmful offers; (ii) protect minors\nfrom accessing gambling facilities, recalling that the protection\nof minors must be a priority not least because 75% of 6-17 year\nolds in Europe use the internet; (iii) safeguard other vulnerable\ngroups and (iv) prevent the development of gambling-related\ndisorders, since it can be estimated that between 0.5-3% of the\npopulation in the EU suffer from some type of gambling\ndisorder.
\nThe paper notes also that responsible advertising is\nimperative in order to ensure that citizens are aware\nthat:
\nAs a first step the Commission will prepare a\nRecommendation on common protection of consumers, which\nshould include a set of principles including effective and\nefficient registration of players, age verification and\nidentification controls – in particular in the context of\nmoney transactions, reality checks (account activity, warning\nsigns, signposting to helplines), no credit policy, protection of\nplayer funds, self-restriction possibilities (time/financial\nlimits, exclusion) as well as customer support and efficient\nhandling of complaints.
\nThe Commission will also prepare a Recommendation\non responsible gambling advertising in 2013 to ensure that\noperators authorised in a given Member State advertise gambling in\na socially responsible manner and provide key information to\nconsumers.
\nThe Commission will, inter alia:
\nMember States are urged to:
\n(4) Preventing fraud and money\nlaundering: the main public interest\nobjectives of Member States with regard to public order are the\nprevention of gambling fraud and money laundering. Credit card\nfraud and theft of banking credentials are reported to be the most\ncommon crime in relation to on-line gambling. Online gambling may\nalso be used for laundering of funds stemming from illegal\nactivities. These criminal offences are often committed\ncross-border and involve organised crime.
\nThe Commission will:
\n(5) Safeguarding the integrity of sports and\npreventing match-fixing: betting\nrelated match fixing is a specific type of fraud that goes against\nthe interests of sport organisations, sportspeople, players\n(consumers) and regulated gambling operators. The Commission will\ndevelop a Recommendation anti-match fixing measures with a\nview to:
\nThe Commission will also:
\nMember States are urged to:
\nLastly, the Commission will publish a report within\ntwo years, assessing these actions, notably with regard to the\nobjectives of a more effective protection of consumers and\ndeterrence of match-fixing. It will also assess whether these\nactions provide an adequate EU framework for online gambling or if\nadditional measures, where necessary legislative ones, need to be\ntaken at EU level.
\nPURPOSE: Commission Communication on a strategy to\nmeet the regulatory and technical challenges of the online gambling\nsector.
\nCONTENT: online gambling is a fast growing service\nactivity in the EU, with annual growth rates of almost 15% and\nestimated annual revenues in 2015 in the region of EUR 13 billion,\ncompared to EUR 9.3 billion in 2011. This would represent a total\ngrowth rate of almost 40%. It is estimated that about 6.84 million\nEuropean consumers participate in online gambling.
\nThe nature of the online environment means that\ngambling sites may operate in the EU, outside any form of control\ncarried out by regulators within the EU. Consumers in Europe also\nsearch across borders for online gambling services which, if not\nproperly regulated, may expose them to significant risks. The\nextensive range of offers and the rising level of demand for online\ngambling services pose a number of challenges when it comes to\nensuring the proper implementation of public policy objectives at\nthe national, EU and international level.
\nFollowing the Commission Green Paper in\n2011 and the European Parliament\nresolution on online gambling in the internal\nmarket, this Communication identifies the key challenges posed by\nthe co-existence of national regulatory frameworks within the\ninternal market. It also seeks to propose answers to these\nchallenges in the form of actions to be taken both at the national\nand EU level.
\nThe paper points out that while Member States are in\nprinciple free to set the objectives of their policy on games of\nchance and to define in detail the level of protection sought,\nnational regulatory frameworks have to comply with EU law and\ninternal market rules. Ensuring compliance of national law with the\nTreaty is therefore essential to a successful EU policy on online\ngambling. In view of the type of challenges posed by the\ndevelopment of online gambling and their implications for each\nMember State, it is not possible for Member States effectively to\naddress these challenges alone and to provide individually a\nproperly regulated and sufficiently safe offer of online gambling\nservices.
\nThe Communication proposes a combination of\ninitiatives and measures covering a range of issues, seeking to\nenhance legal clarity and establish policies based on available\nevidence. These actions, fully taking into account the principles\nof subsidiarity and proportionality, highlight five priority areas\nto address the challenges in the EU.
\n(1) Compliance of national regulatory frameworks with\nEU law: online gambling regulation in\nMember States is characterised by a diversity of regulatory\nframeworks. Recent regulatory changes in Member States have led to\nan increase in the offer of gambling services by operators\nauthorised in an EU Member State over the last few years and to\nconsiderable differences in national regulations. Furthermore,\ncross-border offers are often not authorised under national\nrules in the recipient Member State.
\nCompliance of these national rules with the Treaty has\nbeen challenged in front of national 6 courts and questions on the\ninterpretation of EU law have been referred to the European Court\nof Justice (ECJ). The ECJ has confirmed that national rules that\nprohibit the provision of gambling services authorised in other\nMember States were found to restrict the freedom of national\nresidents to receive, over the internet, services offered in other\nMember States. They also restrict the freedom of operators\nestablished in other Member States to provide gambling\nservices.
\nThe national rules in question focus mainly on\nconsumer protection objectives, in particular the prevention of\nproblem gambling and the protection of minors, and on crime and\nfraud prevention. While Member States usually offer legitimate\nreasons for the restriction of cross border gambling services, they\nmust nonetheless demonstrate the necessity of the measure in\nquestion, in particular the existence of a problem linked to the\npublic interest objective at stake and the consistency of the\nregulatory system.
\nThe Commission has launched infringement cases\nagainst a significant number of Member States, and will accelerate\nits assessment of national provisions in the pending infringements\ncases and complaints and take enforcement action wherever\nnecessary.
\n(2) Enhancing administrative cooperation and efficient\nenforcement: enhancing administrative\ncooperation will assist Member States and gambling regulators in\ntheir regulatory and supervisory role and improve the quality of\ntheir work. Practical cooperation will enable Member States to\nbecome familiar with the systems of others, and to develop closer\nworking relations at the operational level.
\nThe Commission will:
\nMember States are urged to:
\n(3) Protecting consumers and citizens, minors and\nvulnerable groups: appropriate action\nin the EU is needed so as to: (i) draw consumers away from\nunregulated and potentially harmful offers; (ii) protect minors\nfrom accessing gambling facilities, recalling that the protection\nof minors must be a priority not least because 75% of 6-17 year\nolds in Europe use the internet; (iii) safeguard other vulnerable\ngroups and (iv) prevent the development of gambling-related\ndisorders, since it can be estimated that between 0.5-3% of the\npopulation in the EU suffer from some type of gambling\ndisorder.
\nThe paper notes also that responsible advertising is\nimperative in order to ensure that citizens are aware\nthat:
\nAs a first step the Commission will prepare a\nRecommendation on common protection of consumers, which\nshould include a set of principles including effective and\nefficient registration of players, age verification and\nidentification controls – in particular in the context of\nmoney transactions, reality checks (account activity, warning\nsigns, signposting to helplines), no credit policy, protection of\nplayer funds, self-restriction possibilities (time/financial\nlimits, exclusion) as well as customer support and efficient\nhandling of complaints.
\nThe Commission will also prepare a Recommendation\non responsible gambling advertising in 2013 to ensure that\noperators authorised in a given Member State advertise gambling in\na socially responsible manner and provide key information to\nconsumers.
\nThe Commission will, inter alia:
\nMember States are urged to:
\n(4) Preventing fraud and money\nlaundering: the main public interest\nobjectives of Member States with regard to public order are the\nprevention of gambling fraud and money laundering. Credit card\nfraud and theft of banking credentials are reported to be the most\ncommon crime in relation to on-line gambling. Online gambling may\nalso be used for laundering of funds stemming from illegal\nactivities. These criminal offences are often committed\ncross-border and involve organised crime.
\nThe Commission will:
\n(5) Safeguarding the integrity of sports and\npreventing match-fixing: betting\nrelated match fixing is a specific type of fraud that goes against\nthe interests of sport organisations, sportspeople, players\n(consumers) and regulated gambling operators. The Commission will\ndevelop a Recommendation anti-match fixing measures with a\nview to:
\nThe Commission will also:
\nMember States are urged to:
\nLastly, the Commission will publish a report within\ntwo years, assessing these actions, notably with regard to the\nobjectives of a more effective protection of consumers and\ndeterrence of match-fixing. It will also assess whether these\nactions provide an adequate EU framework for online gambling or if\nadditional measures, where necessary legislative ones, need to be\ntaken at EU level.
\nPURPOSE: to present the first report from the\nCommission on the application of Directive 2010/13/EU \"Audiovisual\nMedia Service Directive (AMSD)\" covering the period\n2009-2010.
\nCONTENT: the report comprises two parts:
\n\n· \nthe first part of the report looks\nretrospectively at the implementation of the Directive, including\nquestions about the effectiveness of qualitative advertising rules\nin a sector where the offer and individuals' response to\nadvertising are changing.
\n\n· \nthe second part addresses, in a prospective way,\nthe influence of important technological changes on the regulatory\nframework as traditional broadcasting and internet rapidly\nconverge. By the end of 2011 notifications had been received from a\ntotal of 23 Member States, twenty of which amounted to full\ntranspositions.
\nGenerally, the report concludes that the European\nregulatory framework for audiovisual media services has served\ncitizens and businesses well.
\n\n· \nFor business, it has provided the stable legal\nframework, which media service providers need to make business\ndecisions. Since its creation, the regulatory framework has allowed\nthe market to grow from a small number of service providers to more\nthan 7,500 broadcasters today. It has also enabled the development\nand growth of video-on-demand services, the estimated number of on\ndemand services in the EU amounting to at least 650 as of January\n2012. In February 20122 the number of online video-on-demand is\nestimated at 251 in the EU.
\n\n· \nFrom a citizen's perspective, access to channels\nand choice of audiovisual services has increased significantly. In\n2009, television-viewing time increased in almost all Member\nStates, with the daily average ranging from 145 minutes in Austria\nto 265 in Hungary.
\nThe Commission considers, nevertheless, that some\npoints need attention:
\nAudiovisual commercial communications: in this field, several of the issues involved should\nbe further monitored and assessed in order to strengthen the\neffectiveness of the rules having regard to their\nobjective.
\n\n· \nThe proportion of advertising and teleshopping\nspots on television may not exceed 12 minutes per hour. The\nCommission monitored advertising practices in eight Member States\nduring the reference period. In a number of Member States the\n12-minute limitation of advertising spots is regularly\nbreached. The Commission intends to continue monitoring Member\nStates' compliance with the 12-minute rule and, if necessary,\ninitiate infringement procedures.
\n\n· \nThe monitoring of advertising practices also\nrevealed a number of issues in the area of commercial\ncommunications concerning sponsorship, self-promotion and\nproduct placement. This shows a need to clarify the rules\ngoverning the various forms of commercial\ncommunications.
\n\n· \nIn the Member States monitored, alcohol\nadvertising represents between 0.8% and 3% of overall\nadvertising activity on audiovisual media services based on the\ntotal number of spots broadcast over the monitored period. Very few\ncases of clear infringements have been found. However, a\nsignificant proportion, more than 50%, of the advertising spots\ncontained elements which might be linked to some of the\ncharacteristics banned by the AVMSD, although they fell short of\nconstituting a clear-cut infringement.
\n\n· \nWith regard to advertising targeting\nchildren, content analysis of the 100 most frequently broadcast\nadvertising spots showed that the Directive’s provisions on\nthe protection of minors in advertising were seldom contravened. As\nwith alcohol advertising, because of the detailed wording of the\nrelevant provisions, there are few infringements of the AVMSD.\nNevertheless, it does appear that advertising techniques geared\ntowards minors are frequently used in television advertising. Five\nMember States prohibit advertising in children’s programmes.\nFour Member States impose a partial ban and seven Member States\nprohibit the showing of sponsorship logos in children’s\nprogrammes.
\nIn view of the above, the Commission will update in\n2013 the Interpretative Communication on certain aspects of the\nprovisions on televised advertising in the ‘Television Without\nFrontiers’ Directive. Further investigations are required to\nassess the impact of commercial communications, especially for\nalcoholic beverages, on minors as regards exposure and\nconsumption.
\nIn the more specific area of audiovisual commercial\ncommunications in children’s programmes for sweet, fatty or\nsalty foods or drinks, Member States must encourage audiovisual\nmedia service providers to develop codes of conduct regarding\ninappropriate audiovisual commercial communications in\nchildren’s programmes. The effectiveness of such codes of\nconduct must be further assessed.
\nTechnological progress: the report stresses that foreseeable technological\ndevelopments might blur the boundaries between broadcasting and\nover the top delivery of audiovisual content. As a result, the\ncurrent regulatory framework set by the AVMSD may have to be\ntested against evolving viewing and delivery patterns, taking\ninto account related policy goals such as consumers' protection and\nthe level of media literacy.
\nAs the possible impact on the market and the\nregulatory framework is not yet totally clear, a full assessment\nof the current and future situation should be made. The\nCommission launched an open debate with stakeholders about\n\"over-the-top\" delivery of audiovisual content and will deepen this\nanalysis in the coming months in view of a policy document on\nconnected TV.
\nThe Committee on Culture and Education adopted the\ninitiative report by Piotr BORYS (EPP, PL) in follow-up to the\nCommission’s first report on the Implementation of the\nAudiovisual Media Services Directive (AVMSD) covering the period\n2009-2010.
\nMembers remind the Commission of its commitment to the\nsmart regulation agenda, and the importance of making timely and\npertinent ex-post controls of EU legislation in order to\nmanage the quality of regulation throughout the policy cycle and\nnote that the Commission has submitted its application report with\na significant delay.
\nThe report notes that the Member States have\nimplemented the AVMSD in a particularly diverse manner and\nthat the ‘country of origin’ principle, when properly\napplied, gives broadcasters important clarity and certainty about\ntheir operational arrangements.
\nMembers deplore that the Commission’s application\nreport does not assess the need for a possible adaptation of the\nAVMSD in view of these findings, as required by the\nDirective.
\nThey strongly support a technology-neutral\napproach, in view of evolving viewing and delivery patterns, to\nfacilitate increased consumer choice and call, in this regard, for\na full impact assessment of the current state of play on the\nmarket and of the regulatory framework.
\n- Accessibility (Article 7): Members point out that the Commission’s report\nneither fully addresses the issue of accessibility, nor assesses\nthe effectiveness of the implementation of the appropriate\nprovisions in individual Member States.
\nThey call on the Commission to monitor the situation\nregarding the provision of media services to people with\ndisabilities and the elderly, stressing the need for the Member\nStates to encourage broadcasters to gain a better understanding of\ntheir needs. They point to the need for wider accessibility of\nprogrammes, in particular those rendered via on-demand services,\nthrough further developments in, inter alia, audio description,\naudio/spoken subtitles, sign language and menu navigation, notably\nof electronic programme guides (EPGs).
\nThey believe that Article 7 of the AVMSD should be\nreworded in order to include stronger, binding language, requiring\nmedia service providers to ensure that their services are made\navailable to people with disabilities.
\n- Exclusive rights and short news reports (Articles 14\n& 15): Members call on the\nCommission, in its next report on the application of the AVMSD, to\nassess whether the Member States have implemented this directive in\na way that preserves the necessary and existing balance between\nsafeguarding the principle of freedom of access to information,\nespecially on events of high interest to society, and the\nprotection of rights holders.
\nWelcoming the approach taken by the Commission and the\nEuropean Court of Justice in relation to the interpretation of the\nAVMSD, they call for a continued broad interpretation of the\nterm ‘events which are regarded as being of major importance\nfor society’, including sports and entertainment events that\nare of general interest, and encourage the Member States to draw up\nlists of such events.
\n- Promotion of European audiovisual works (Article\n13): Members highlight that while\nmost Member States comply with the rules relating to the promotion\nof European works, priority is still given to national\nworks, whilst the percentage of independent works on TV\nis on the decline. They consider that the data submitted by the\nCommission in its report are insufficient for the reaching\nof suitable conclusions.
\nThey call on the Member States to take effective\nmeasures to promote better synergies among regulatory\nauthorities, audiovisual media services providers and the\nCommission, so that EU films can reach a wider audience both within\nand beyond the EU on linear and non-linear services. They also\nrecommend strengthening the role of the European Audiovisual\nObservatory, which they consider would be an appropriate\nsolution for collecting data concerning the promotion of European\naudiovisual works.
\n- Protection of minors: Members recognise the efforts made by the advertising\nindustry and members of the EU Pledge, to respond to the\nAVMSD’s call for codes of conduct for commercial\ncommunications, accompanying or included in children’s\nprogrammes, of foods and beverages high in fat, sugar and salt.\nThey stress that co-regulatory and self-regulatory\ninitiatives, particularly in the field of advertising that\ntargets minors, represent an advance on the prior situation because\nthey offer a means of reacting more swiftly to developments in the\nrapidly changing world of the media. They note, however, that such\ninitiatives may not always be sufficiently effective in all Member\nStates and that they should be regarded as complementary to\nlegal provisions in realising the aims of the AVMSD,\nparticularly in an online context.
\nThey invite the Commission to consider how the basic\nrequirements of the AVMSD applicable to non-linear services can be\nextended to other online content and services which are\ncurrently out of its scope, and what steps need to be taken to\ncreate a level playing field for all operators and call on it to\npresent to Parliament the results of its considerations no later\nthan 31 December 2013.
\n- Advertising (Article 9): Members note that the 12-minute hourly advertising\nlimit has been breached in some Member States and urge the Member\nStates concerned to implement fully, correctly and without delay\nthe provisions of the AVMSD in this respect.
\nThey also urge the Commission, while monitoring\ncompliance with existing rules setting out qualitative and\nquantitative stipulations on advertising, to have an eye towards\nfuture challenges, e.g. that of Connected TV, in terms of\nthe competitiveness and the sustainable financing of audiovisual\nmedia services.
\nMembers welcome the Commission’s intention to\nupdate its interpretative communication on certain aspects\nof the provisions on televised advertising in 2013.
\n- Media literacy: Members take note of the findings by the Commission\nwith regard to the level of media literacy in the Member States.\nThey note that access to channels, and the choice of audiovisual\nservices, has increased significantly and call on the Commission\nand the Member States to promote media literacy for all EU\ncitizens through initiatives and coordinated actions, in order\nto increase the critical understanding of audiovisual media\nservices.
\n- Future challenges: Members regret that the Commission only partially\ncarried out its reporting task in keeping with its obligation under\nthe AVMSD, and call for an interim evaluation before the\nnext Commission application report.
\nThey call on the Commission to monitor closely the\ndevelopment of hybrid services in the EU, in particular\nConnected TV, to establish in its Green Paper on Connected TV the\nvarious issues they raise and to pursue those issues through public\nconsultation.
\nLastly, Members also call on the Commission to\naddress, in particular, the uncertainties surrounding the use of\nthe term ‘on-demand audiovisual media services’ and,\nwith an eye both to greater consistency in EU legislation affecting\non-demand audiovisual services and to likely developments in media\nconvergence, to establish a clearer definition of the term\nso that the regulatory aims of the AVMSD can be achieved more\neffectively.
\nPURPOSE: to present the first report from the\nCommission on the application of Directive 2010/13/EU \"Audiovisual\nMedia Service Directive (AMSD)\" covering the period\n2009-2010.
\nCONTENT: the report comprises two parts:
\n\n· \nthe first part of the report looks\nretrospectively at the implementation of the Directive, including\nquestions about the effectiveness of qualitative advertising rules\nin a sector where the offer and individuals' response to\nadvertising are changing.
\n\n· \nthe second part addresses, in a prospective way,\nthe influence of important technological changes on the regulatory\nframework as traditional broadcasting and internet rapidly\nconverge. By the end of 2011 notifications had been received from a\ntotal of 23 Member States, twenty of which amounted to full\ntranspositions.
\nGenerally, the report concludes that the European\nregulatory framework for audiovisual media services has served\ncitizens and businesses well.
\n\n· \nFor business, it has provided the stable legal\nframework, which media service providers need to make business\ndecisions. Since its creation, the regulatory framework has allowed\nthe market to grow from a small number of service providers to more\nthan 7,500 broadcasters today. It has also enabled the development\nand growth of video-on-demand services, the estimated number of on\ndemand services in the EU amounting to at least 650 as of January\n2012. In February 20122 the number of online video-on-demand is\nestimated at 251 in the EU.
\n\n· \nFrom a citizen's perspective, access to channels\nand choice of audiovisual services has increased significantly. In\n2009, television-viewing time increased in almost all Member\nStates, with the daily average ranging from 145 minutes in Austria\nto 265 in Hungary.
\nThe Commission considers, nevertheless, that some\npoints need attention:
\nAudiovisual commercial communications: in this field, several of the issues involved should\nbe further monitored and assessed in order to strengthen the\neffectiveness of the rules having regard to their\nobjective.
\n\n· \nThe proportion of advertising and teleshopping\nspots on television may not exceed 12 minutes per hour. The\nCommission monitored advertising practices in eight Member States\nduring the reference period. In a number of Member States the\n12-minute limitation of advertising spots is regularly\nbreached. The Commission intends to continue monitoring Member\nStates' compliance with the 12-minute rule and, if necessary,\ninitiate infringement procedures.
\n\n· \nThe monitoring of advertising practices also\nrevealed a number of issues in the area of commercial\ncommunications concerning sponsorship, self-promotion and\nproduct placement. This shows a need to clarify the rules\ngoverning the various forms of commercial\ncommunications.
\n\n· \nIn the Member States monitored, alcohol\nadvertising represents between 0.8% and 3% of overall\nadvertising activity on audiovisual media services based on the\ntotal number of spots broadcast over the monitored period. Very few\ncases of clear infringements have been found. However, a\nsignificant proportion, more than 50%, of the advertising spots\ncontained elements which might be linked to some of the\ncharacteristics banned by the AVMSD, although they fell short of\nconstituting a clear-cut infringement.
\n\n· \nWith regard to advertising targeting\nchildren, content analysis of the 100 most frequently broadcast\nadvertising spots showed that the Directive’s provisions on\nthe protection of minors in advertising were seldom contravened. As\nwith alcohol advertising, because of the detailed wording of the\nrelevant provisions, there are few infringements of the AVMSD.\nNevertheless, it does appear that advertising techniques geared\ntowards minors are frequently used in television advertising. Five\nMember States prohibit advertising in children’s programmes.\nFour Member States impose a partial ban and seven Member States\nprohibit the showing of sponsorship logos in children’s\nprogrammes.
\nIn view of the above, the Commission will update in\n2013 the Interpretative Communication on certain aspects of the\nprovisions on televised advertising in the ‘Television Without\nFrontiers’ Directive. Further investigations are required to\nassess the impact of commercial communications, especially for\nalcoholic beverages, on minors as regards exposure and\nconsumption.
\nIn the more specific area of audiovisual commercial\ncommunications in children’s programmes for sweet, fatty or\nsalty foods or drinks, Member States must encourage audiovisual\nmedia service providers to develop codes of conduct regarding\ninappropriate audiovisual commercial communications in\nchildren’s programmes. The effectiveness of such codes of\nconduct must be further assessed.
\nTechnological progress: the report stresses that foreseeable technological\ndevelopments might blur the boundaries between broadcasting and\nover the top delivery of audiovisual content. As a result, the\ncurrent regulatory framework set by the AVMSD may have to be\ntested against evolving viewing and delivery patterns, taking\ninto account related policy goals such as consumers' protection and\nthe level of media literacy.
\nAs the possible impact on the market and the\nregulatory framework is not yet totally clear, a full assessment\nof the current and future situation should be made. The\nCommission launched an open debate with stakeholders about\n\"over-the-top\" delivery of audiovisual content and will deepen this\nanalysis in the coming months in view of a policy document on\nconnected TV.
\nPURPOSE: to present the first report from the\nCommission on the application of Directive 2010/13/EU \"Audiovisual\nMedia Service Directive (AMSD)\" covering the period\n2009-2010.
\nCONTENT: the report comprises two parts:
\n\n· \nthe first part of the report looks\nretrospectively at the implementation of the Directive, including\nquestions about the effectiveness of qualitative advertising rules\nin a sector where the offer and individuals' response to\nadvertising are changing.
\n\n· \nthe second part addresses, in a prospective way,\nthe influence of important technological changes on the regulatory\nframework as traditional broadcasting and internet rapidly\nconverge. By the end of 2011 notifications had been received from a\ntotal of 23 Member States, twenty of which amounted to full\ntranspositions.
\nGenerally, the report concludes that the European\nregulatory framework for audiovisual media services has served\ncitizens and businesses well.
\n\n· \nFor business, it has provided the stable legal\nframework, which media service providers need to make business\ndecisions. Since its creation, the regulatory framework has allowed\nthe market to grow from a small number of service providers to more\nthan 7,500 broadcasters today. It has also enabled the development\nand growth of video-on-demand services, the estimated number of on\ndemand services in the EU amounting to at least 650 as of January\n2012. In February 20122 the number of online video-on-demand is\nestimated at 251 in the EU.
\n\n· \nFrom a citizen's perspective, access to channels\nand choice of audiovisual services has increased significantly. In\n2009, television-viewing time increased in almost all Member\nStates, with the daily average ranging from 145 minutes in Austria\nto 265 in Hungary.
\nThe Commission considers, nevertheless, that some\npoints need attention:
\nAudiovisual commercial communications: in this field, several of the issues involved should\nbe further monitored and assessed in order to strengthen the\neffectiveness of the rules having regard to their\nobjective.
\n\n· \nThe proportion of advertising and teleshopping\nspots on television may not exceed 12 minutes per hour. The\nCommission monitored advertising practices in eight Member States\nduring the reference period. In a number of Member States the\n12-minute limitation of advertising spots is regularly\nbreached. The Commission intends to continue monitoring Member\nStates' compliance with the 12-minute rule and, if necessary,\ninitiate infringement procedures.
\n\n· \nThe monitoring of advertising practices also\nrevealed a number of issues in the area of commercial\ncommunications concerning sponsorship, self-promotion and\nproduct placement. This shows a need to clarify the rules\ngoverning the various forms of commercial\ncommunications.
\n\n· \nIn the Member States monitored, alcohol\nadvertising represents between 0.8% and 3% of overall\nadvertising activity on audiovisual media services based on the\ntotal number of spots broadcast over the monitored period. Very few\ncases of clear infringements have been found. However, a\nsignificant proportion, more than 50%, of the advertising spots\ncontained elements which might be linked to some of the\ncharacteristics banned by the AVMSD, although they fell short of\nconstituting a clear-cut infringement.
\n\n· \nWith regard to advertising targeting\nchildren, content analysis of the 100 most frequently broadcast\nadvertising spots showed that the Directive’s provisions on\nthe protection of minors in advertising were seldom contravened. As\nwith alcohol advertising, because of the detailed wording of the\nrelevant provisions, there are few infringements of the AVMSD.\nNevertheless, it does appear that advertising techniques geared\ntowards minors are frequently used in television advertising. Five\nMember States prohibit advertising in children’s programmes.\nFour Member States impose a partial ban and seven Member States\nprohibit the showing of sponsorship logos in children’s\nprogrammes.
\nIn view of the above, the Commission will update in\n2013 the Interpretative Communication on certain aspects of the\nprovisions on televised advertising in the ‘Television Without\nFrontiers’ Directive. Further investigations are required to\nassess the impact of commercial communications, especially for\nalcoholic beverages, on minors as regards exposure and\nconsumption.
\nIn the more specific area of audiovisual commercial\ncommunications in children’s programmes for sweet, fatty or\nsalty foods or drinks, Member States must encourage audiovisual\nmedia service providers to develop codes of conduct regarding\ninappropriate audiovisual commercial communications in\nchildren’s programmes. The effectiveness of such codes of\nconduct must be further assessed.
\nTechnological progress: the report stresses that foreseeable technological\ndevelopments might blur the boundaries between broadcasting and\nover the top delivery of audiovisual content. As a result, the\ncurrent regulatory framework set by the AVMSD may have to be\ntested against evolving viewing and delivery patterns, taking\ninto account related policy goals such as consumers' protection and\nthe level of media literacy.
\nAs the possible impact on the market and the\nregulatory framework is not yet totally clear, a full assessment\nof the current and future situation should be made. The\nCommission launched an open debate with stakeholders about\n\"over-the-top\" delivery of audiovisual content and will deepen this\nanalysis in the coming months in view of a policy document on\nconnected TV.
\nPURPOSE: to present the first report from the\nCommission on the application of Directive 2010/13/EU \"Audiovisual\nMedia Service Directive (AMSD)\" covering the period\n2009-2010.
\nCONTENT: the report comprises two parts:
\n\n· \nthe first part of the report looks\nretrospectively at the implementation of the Directive, including\nquestions about the effectiveness of qualitative advertising rules\nin a sector where the offer and individuals' response to\nadvertising are changing.
\n\n· \nthe second part addresses, in a prospective way,\nthe influence of important technological changes on the regulatory\nframework as traditional broadcasting and internet rapidly\nconverge. By the end of 2011 notifications had been received from a\ntotal of 23 Member States, twenty of which amounted to full\ntranspositions.
\nGenerally, the report concludes that the European\nregulatory framework for audiovisual media services has served\ncitizens and businesses well.
\n\n· \nFor business, it has provided the stable legal\nframework, which media service providers need to make business\ndecisions. Since its creation, the regulatory framework has allowed\nthe market to grow from a small number of service providers to more\nthan 7,500 broadcasters today. It has also enabled the development\nand growth of video-on-demand services, the estimated number of on\ndemand services in the EU amounting to at least 650 as of January\n2012. In February 20122 the number of online video-on-demand is\nestimated at 251 in the EU.
\n\n· \nFrom a citizen's perspective, access to channels\nand choice of audiovisual services has increased significantly. In\n2009, television-viewing time increased in almost all Member\nStates, with the daily average ranging from 145 minutes in Austria\nto 265 in Hungary.
\nThe Commission considers, nevertheless, that some\npoints need attention:
\nAudiovisual commercial communications: in this field, several of the issues involved should\nbe further monitored and assessed in order to strengthen the\neffectiveness of the rules having regard to their\nobjective.
\n\n· \nThe proportion of advertising and teleshopping\nspots on television may not exceed 12 minutes per hour. The\nCommission monitored advertising practices in eight Member States\nduring the reference period. In a number of Member States the\n12-minute limitation of advertising spots is regularly\nbreached. The Commission intends to continue monitoring Member\nStates' compliance with the 12-minute rule and, if necessary,\ninitiate infringement procedures.
\n\n· \nThe monitoring of advertising practices also\nrevealed a number of issues in the area of commercial\ncommunications concerning sponsorship, self-promotion and\nproduct placement. This shows a need to clarify the rules\ngoverning the various forms of commercial\ncommunications.
\n\n· \nIn the Member States monitored, alcohol\nadvertising represents between 0.8% and 3% of overall\nadvertising activity on audiovisual media services based on the\ntotal number of spots broadcast over the monitored period. Very few\ncases of clear infringements have been found. However, a\nsignificant proportion, more than 50%, of the advertising spots\ncontained elements which might be linked to some of the\ncharacteristics banned by the AVMSD, although they fell short of\nconstituting a clear-cut infringement.
\n\n· \nWith regard to advertising targeting\nchildren, content analysis of the 100 most frequently broadcast\nadvertising spots showed that the Directive’s provisions on\nthe protection of minors in advertising were seldom contravened. As\nwith alcohol advertising, because of the detailed wording of the\nrelevant provisions, there are few infringements of the AVMSD.\nNevertheless, it does appear that advertising techniques geared\ntowards minors are frequently used in television advertising. Five\nMember States prohibit advertising in children’s programmes.\nFour Member States impose a partial ban and seven Member States\nprohibit the showing of sponsorship logos in children’s\nprogrammes.
\nIn view of the above, the Commission will update in\n2013 the Interpretative Communication on certain aspects of the\nprovisions on televised advertising in the ‘Television Without\nFrontiers’ Directive. Further investigations are required to\nassess the impact of commercial communications, especially for\nalcoholic beverages, on minors as regards exposure and\nconsumption.
\nIn the more specific area of audiovisual commercial\ncommunications in children’s programmes for sweet, fatty or\nsalty foods or drinks, Member States must encourage audiovisual\nmedia service providers to develop codes of conduct regarding\ninappropriate audiovisual commercial communications in\nchildren’s programmes. The effectiveness of such codes of\nconduct must be further assessed.
\nTechnological progress: the report stresses that foreseeable technological\ndevelopments might blur the boundaries between broadcasting and\nover the top delivery of audiovisual content. As a result, the\ncurrent regulatory framework set by the AVMSD may have to be\ntested against evolving viewing and delivery patterns, taking\ninto account related policy goals such as consumers' protection and\nthe level of media literacy.
\nAs the possible impact on the market and the\nregulatory framework is not yet totally clear, a full assessment\nof the current and future situation should be made. The\nCommission launched an open debate with stakeholders about\n\"over-the-top\" delivery of audiovisual content and will deepen this\nanalysis in the coming months in view of a policy document on\nconnected TV.
\nPURPOSE: to present the first report from the\nCommission on the application of Directive 2010/13/EU \"Audiovisual\nMedia Service Directive (AMSD)\" covering the period\n2009-2010.
\nCONTENT: the report comprises two parts:
\n\n· \nthe first part of the report looks\nretrospectively at the implementation of the Directive, including\nquestions about the effectiveness of qualitative advertising rules\nin a sector where the offer and individuals' response to\nadvertising are changing.
\n\n· \nthe second part addresses, in a prospective way,\nthe influence of important technological changes on the regulatory\nframework as traditional broadcasting and internet rapidly\nconverge. By the end of 2011 notifications had been received from a\ntotal of 23 Member States, twenty of which amounted to full\ntranspositions.
\nGenerally, the report concludes that the European\nregulatory framework for audiovisual media services has served\ncitizens and businesses well.
\n\n· \nFor business, it has provided the stable legal\nframework, which media service providers need to make business\ndecisions. Since its creation, the regulatory framework has allowed\nthe market to grow from a small number of service providers to more\nthan 7,500 broadcasters today. It has also enabled the development\nand growth of video-on-demand services, the estimated number of on\ndemand services in the EU amounting to at least 650 as of January\n2012. In February 20122 the number of online video-on-demand is\nestimated at 251 in the EU.
\n\n· \nFrom a citizen's perspective, access to channels\nand choice of audiovisual services has increased significantly. In\n2009, television-viewing time increased in almost all Member\nStates, with the daily average ranging from 145 minutes in Austria\nto 265 in Hungary.
\nThe Commission considers, nevertheless, that some\npoints need attention:
\nAudiovisual commercial communications: in this field, several of the issues involved should\nbe further monitored and assessed in order to strengthen the\neffectiveness of the rules having regard to their\nobjective.
\n\n· \nThe proportion of advertising and teleshopping\nspots on television may not exceed 12 minutes per hour. The\nCommission monitored advertising practices in eight Member States\nduring the reference period. In a number of Member States the\n12-minute limitation of advertising spots is regularly\nbreached. The Commission intends to continue monitoring Member\nStates' compliance with the 12-minute rule and, if necessary,\ninitiate infringement procedures.
\n\n· \nThe monitoring of advertising practices also\nrevealed a number of issues in the area of commercial\ncommunications concerning sponsorship, self-promotion and\nproduct placement. This shows a need to clarify the rules\ngoverning the various forms of commercial\ncommunications.
\n\n· \nIn the Member States monitored, alcohol\nadvertising represents between 0.8% and 3% of overall\nadvertising activity on audiovisual media services based on the\ntotal number of spots broadcast over the monitored period. Very few\ncases of clear infringements have been found. However, a\nsignificant proportion, more than 50%, of the advertising spots\ncontained elements which might be linked to some of the\ncharacteristics banned by the AVMSD, although they fell short of\nconstituting a clear-cut infringement.
\n\n· \nWith regard to advertising targeting\nchildren, content analysis of the 100 most frequently broadcast\nadvertising spots showed that the Directive’s provisions on\nthe protection of minors in advertising were seldom contravened. As\nwith alcohol advertising, because of the detailed wording of the\nrelevant provisions, there are few infringements of the AVMSD.\nNevertheless, it does appear that advertising techniques geared\ntowards minors are frequently used in television advertising. Five\nMember States prohibit advertising in children’s programmes.\nFour Member States impose a partial ban and seven Member States\nprohibit the showing of sponsorship logos in children’s\nprogrammes.
\nIn view of the above, the Commission will update in\n2013 the Interpretative Communication on certain aspects of the\nprovisions on televised advertising in the ‘Television Without\nFrontiers’ Directive. Further investigations are required to\nassess the impact of commercial communications, especially for\nalcoholic beverages, on minors as regards exposure and\nconsumption.
\nIn the more specific area of audiovisual commercial\ncommunications in children’s programmes for sweet, fatty or\nsalty foods or drinks, Member States must encourage audiovisual\nmedia service providers to develop codes of conduct regarding\ninappropriate audiovisual commercial communications in\nchildren’s programmes. The effectiveness of such codes of\nconduct must be further assessed.
\nTechnological progress: the report stresses that foreseeable technological\ndevelopments might blur the boundaries between broadcasting and\nover the top delivery of audiovisual content. As a result, the\ncurrent regulatory framework set by the AVMSD may have to be\ntested against evolving viewing and delivery patterns, taking\ninto account related policy goals such as consumers' protection and\nthe level of media literacy.
\nAs the possible impact on the market and the\nregulatory framework is not yet totally clear, a full assessment\nof the current and future situation should be made. The\nCommission launched an open debate with stakeholders about\n\"over-the-top\" delivery of audiovisual content and will deepen this\nanalysis in the coming months in view of a policy document on\nconnected TV.
\nThe Committee on Culture and Education adopted the\ninitiative report by Piotr BORYS (EPP, PL) in follow-up to the\nCommission’s first report on the\nImplementation of the Audiovisual Media Services Directive (AVMSD)\ncovering the period 2009-2010.
\nMembers remind the\nCommission of its commitment to the smart regulation agenda, and\nthe importance of making timely and pertinent ex-post\ncontrols of EU legislation in order to manage the quality of\nregulation throughout the policy cycle and note that the Commission\nhas submitted its application report with a significant\ndelay.
\nThe report notes that the Member States have\nimplemented the AVMSD in a particularly diverse manner and\nthat the ‘country of origin’ principle, when properly\napplied, gives broadcasters important clarity and certainty about\ntheir operational arrangements.
\nMembers deplore that the Commission’s application\nreport does not assess the need for a possible adaptation of the\nAVMSD in view of these findings, as required by the\nDirective.
\nThey strongly support a technology-neutral\napproach, in view of evolving viewing and delivery patterns, to\nfacilitate increased consumer choice and call, in this regard, for\na full impact assessment of the current state of play on the\nmarket and of the regulatory framework.
\n- Accessibility (Article 7): Members point out that the Commission’s report\nneither fully addresses the issue of accessibility, nor assesses\nthe effectiveness of the implementation of the appropriate\nprovisions in individual Member States.
\nThey call on the Commission to monitor the situation\nregarding the provision of media services to people with\ndisabilities and the elderly, stressing the need for the Member\nStates to encourage broadcasters to gain a better understanding of\ntheir needs. They point to the need for wider accessibility of\nprogrammes, in particular those rendered via on-demand services,\nthrough further developments in, inter alia, audio description,\naudio/spoken subtitles, sign language and menu navigation, notably\nof electronic programme guides (EPGs).
\nThey believe that Article 7 of the AVMSD should be\nreworded in order to include stronger, binding language, requiring\nmedia service providers to ensure that their services are made\navailable to people with disabilities.
\n- Exclusive rights and short news reports (Articles 14\n& 15): Members call on the\nCommission, in its next report on the application of the AVMSD, to\nassess whether the Member States have implemented this directive in\na way that preserves the necessary and existing balance between\nsafeguarding the principle of freedom of access to information,\nespecially on events of high interest to society, and the\nprotection of rights holders.
\nWelcoming the approach taken by the Commission and the\nEuropean Court of Justice in relation to the interpretation of the\nAVMSD, they call for a continued broad interpretation of the\nterm ‘events which are regarded as being of major importance\nfor society’, including sports and entertainment events that\nare of general interest, and encourage the Member States to draw up\nlists of such events.
\n- Promotion of European audiovisual works (Article\n13): Members highlight that while\nmost Member States comply with the rules relating to the promotion\nof European works, priority is still given to national\nworks, whilst the percentage of independent works on TV\nis on the decline. They consider that the data submitted by the\nCommission in its report are insufficient for the reaching\nof suitable conclusions.
\nThey call on the Member States to take effective\nmeasures to promote better synergies among regulatory\nauthorities, audiovisual media services providers and the\nCommission, so that EU films can reach a wider audience both within\nand beyond the EU on linear and non-linear services. They also\nrecommend strengthening the role of the European Audiovisual\nObservatory, which they consider would be an appropriate\nsolution for collecting data concerning the promotion of European\naudiovisual works.
\n- Protection of minors: Members recognise the efforts made by the advertising\nindustry and members of the EU Pledge, to respond to the\nAVMSD’s call for codes of conduct for commercial\ncommunications, accompanying or included in children’s\nprogrammes, of foods and beverages high in fat, sugar and salt.\nThey stress that co-regulatory and self-regulatory\ninitiatives, particularly in the field of advertising that\ntargets minors, represent an advance on the prior situation because\nthey offer a means of reacting more swiftly to developments in the\nrapidly changing world of the media. They note, however, that such\ninitiatives may not always be sufficiently effective in all Member\nStates and that they should be regarded as complementary to\nlegal provisions in realising the aims of the AVMSD,\nparticularly in an online context.
\nThey invite the Commission to consider how the basic\nrequirements of the AVMSD applicable to non-linear services can be\nextended to other online content and services which are\ncurrently out of its scope, and what steps need to be taken to\ncreate a level playing field for all operators and call on it to\npresent to Parliament the results of its considerations no later\nthan 31 December 2013.
\n- Advertising (Article 9): Members note that the 12-minute hourly advertising\nlimit has been breached in some Member States and urge the Member\nStates concerned to implement fully, correctly and without delay\nthe provisions of the AVMSD in this respect.
\nThey also urge the Commission, while monitoring\ncompliance with existing rules setting out qualitative and\nquantitative stipulations on advertising, to have an eye towards\nfuture challenges, e.g. that of Connected TV, in terms of\nthe competitiveness and the sustainable financing of audiovisual\nmedia services.
\nMembers welcome the Commission’s intention to\nupdate its interpretative communication on certain aspects\nof the provisions on televised advertising in 2013.
\n- Media literacy: Members take note of the findings by the Commission\nwith regard to the level of media literacy in the Member States.\nThey note that access to channels, and the choice of audiovisual\nservices, has increased significantly and call on the Commission\nand the Member States to promote media literacy for all EU\ncitizens through initiatives and coordinated actions, in order\nto increase the critical understanding of audiovisual media\nservices.
\n- Future challenges: Members regret that the Commission only partially\ncarried out its reporting task in keeping with its obligation under\nthe AVMSD, and call for an interim evaluation before the\nnext Commission application report.
\nThey call on the Commission to monitor closely the\ndevelopment of hybrid services in the EU, in particular\nConnected TV, to establish in its Green Paper on Connected TV the\nvarious issues they raise and to pursue those issues through public\nconsultation.
\nLastly, Members also call on the Commission to\naddress, in particular, the uncertainties surrounding the use of\nthe term ‘on-demand audiovisual media services’ and,\nwith an eye both to greater consistency in EU legislation affecting\non-demand audiovisual services and to likely developments in media\nconvergence, to establish a clearer definition of the term\nso that the regulatory aims of the AVMSD can be achieved more\neffectively.
\nThe Committee on Culture and Education adopted the\ninitiative report by Piotr BORYS (EPP, PL) in follow-up to the\nCommission’s first report on the Implementation of the\nAudiovisual Media Services Directive (AVMSD) covering the period\n2009-2010.
\nMembers remind the Commission of its commitment to the\nsmart regulation agenda, and the importance of making timely and\npertinent ex-post controls of EU legislation in order to\nmanage the quality of regulation throughout the policy cycle and\nnote that the Commission has submitted its application report with\na significant delay.
\nThe report notes that the Member States have\nimplemented the AVMSD in a particularly diverse manner and\nthat the ‘country of origin’ principle, when properly\napplied, gives broadcasters important clarity and certainty about\ntheir operational arrangements.
\nMembers deplore that the Commission’s application\nreport does not assess the need for a possible adaptation of the\nAVMSD in view of these findings, as required by the\nDirective.
\nThey strongly support a technology-neutral\napproach, in view of evolving viewing and delivery patterns, to\nfacilitate increased consumer choice and call, in this regard, for\na full impact assessment of the current state of play on the\nmarket and of the regulatory framework.
\n- Accessibility (Article 7): Members point out that the Commission’s report\nneither fully addresses the issue of accessibility, nor assesses\nthe effectiveness of the implementation of the appropriate\nprovisions in individual Member States.
\nThey call on the Commission to monitor the situation\nregarding the provision of media services to people with\ndisabilities and the elderly, stressing the need for the Member\nStates to encourage broadcasters to gain a better understanding of\ntheir needs. They point to the need for wider accessibility of\nprogrammes, in particular those rendered via on-demand services,\nthrough further developments in, inter alia, audio description,\naudio/spoken subtitles, sign language and menu navigation, notably\nof electronic programme guides (EPGs).
\nThey believe that Article 7 of the AVMSD should be\nreworded in order to include stronger, binding language, requiring\nmedia service providers to ensure that their services are made\navailable to people with disabilities.
\n- Exclusive rights and short news reports (Articles 14\n& 15): Members call on the\nCommission, in its next report on the application of the AVMSD, to\nassess whether the Member States have implemented this directive in\na way that preserves the necessary and existing balance between\nsafeguarding the principle of freedom of access to information,\nespecially on events of high interest to society, and the\nprotection of rights holders.
\nWelcoming the approach taken by the Commission and the\nEuropean Court of Justice in relation to the interpretation of the\nAVMSD, they call for a continued broad interpretation of the\nterm ‘events which are regarded as being of major importance\nfor society’, including sports and entertainment events that\nare of general interest, and encourage the Member States to draw up\nlists of such events.
\n- Promotion of European audiovisual works (Article\n13): Members highlight that while\nmost Member States comply with the rules relating to the promotion\nof European works, priority is still given to national\nworks, whilst the percentage of independent works on TV\nis on the decline. They consider that the data submitted by the\nCommission in its report are insufficient for the reaching\nof suitable conclusions.
\nThey call on the Member States to take effective\nmeasures to promote better synergies among regulatory\nauthorities, audiovisual media services providers and the\nCommission, so that EU films can reach a wider audience both within\nand beyond the EU on linear and non-linear services. They also\nrecommend strengthening the role of the European Audiovisual\nObservatory, which they consider would be an appropriate\nsolution for collecting data concerning the promotion of European\naudiovisual works.
\n- Protection of minors: Members recognise the efforts made by the advertising\nindustry and members of the EU Pledge, to respond to the\nAVMSD’s call for codes of conduct for commercial\ncommunications, accompanying or included in children’s\nprogrammes, of foods and beverages high in fat, sugar and salt.\nThey stress that co-regulatory and self-regulatory\ninitiatives, particularly in the field of advertising that\ntargets minors, represent an advance on the prior situation because\nthey offer a means of reacting more swiftly to developments in the\nrapidly changing world of the media. They note, however, that such\ninitiatives may not always be sufficiently effective in all Member\nStates and that they should be regarded as complementary to\nlegal provisions in realising the aims of the AVMSD,\nparticularly in an online context.
\nThey invite the Commission to consider how the basic\nrequirements of the AVMSD applicable to non-linear services can be\nextended to other online content and services which are\ncurrently out of its scope, and what steps need to be taken to\ncreate a level playing field for all operators and call on it to\npresent to Parliament the results of its considerations no later\nthan 31 December 2013.
\n- Advertising (Article 9): Members note that the 12-minute hourly advertising\nlimit has been breached in some Member States and urge the Member\nStates concerned to implement fully, correctly and without delay\nthe provisions of the AVMSD in this respect.
\nThey also urge the Commission, while monitoring\ncompliance with existing rules setting out qualitative and\nquantitative stipulations on advertising, to have an eye towards\nfuture challenges, e.g. that of Connected TV, in terms of\nthe competitiveness and the sustainable financing of audiovisual\nmedia services.
\nMembers welcome the Commission’s intention to\nupdate its interpretative communication on certain aspects\nof the provisions on televised advertising in 2013.
\n- Media literacy: Members take note of the findings by the Commission\nwith regard to the level of media literacy in the Member States.\nThey note that access to channels, and the choice of audiovisual\nservices, has increased significantly and call on the Commission\nand the Member States to promote media literacy for all EU\ncitizens through initiatives and coordinated actions, in order\nto increase the critical understanding of audiovisual media\nservices.
\n- Future challenges: Members regret that the Commission only partially\ncarried out its reporting task in keeping with its obligation under\nthe AVMSD, and call for an interim evaluation before the\nnext Commission application report.
\nThey call on the Commission to monitor closely the\ndevelopment of hybrid services in the EU, in particular\nConnected TV, to establish in its Green Paper on Connected TV the\nvarious issues they raise and to pursue those issues through public\nconsultation.
\nLastly, Members also call on the Commission to\naddress, in particular, the uncertainties surrounding the use of\nthe term ‘on-demand audiovisual media services’ and,\nwith an eye both to greater consistency in EU legislation affecting\non-demand audiovisual services and to likely developments in media\nconvergence, to establish a clearer definition of the term\nso that the regulatory aims of the AVMSD can be achieved more\neffectively.
\nThe Committee on Culture and Education adopted the\ninitiative report by Piotr BORYS (EPP, PL) in follow-up to the\nCommission’s first report on the\nImplementation of the Audiovisual Media Services Directive (AVMSD)\ncovering the period 2009-2010.
\nMembers remind the\nCommission of its commitment to the smart regulation agenda, and\nthe importance of making timely and pertinent ex-post\ncontrols of EU legislation in order to manage the quality of\nregulation throughout the policy cycle and note that the Commission\nhas submitted its application report with a significant\ndelay.
\nThe report notes that the Member States have\nimplemented the AVMSD in a particularly diverse manner and\nthat the ‘country of origin’ principle, when properly\napplied, gives broadcasters important clarity and certainty about\ntheir operational arrangements.
\nMembers deplore that the Commission’s application\nreport does not assess the need for a possible adaptation of the\nAVMSD in view of these findings, as required by the\nDirective.
\nThey strongly support a technology-neutral\napproach, in view of evolving viewing and delivery patterns, to\nfacilitate increased consumer choice and call, in this regard, for\na full impact assessment of the current state of play on the\nmarket and of the regulatory framework.
\n- Accessibility (Article 7): Members point out that the Commission’s report\nneither fully addresses the issue of accessibility, nor assesses\nthe effectiveness of the implementation of the appropriate\nprovisions in individual Member States.
\nThey call on the Commission to monitor the situation\nregarding the provision of media services to people with\ndisabilities and the elderly, stressing the need for the Member\nStates to encourage broadcasters to gain a better understanding of\ntheir needs. They point to the need for wider accessibility of\nprogrammes, in particular those rendered via on-demand services,\nthrough further developments in, inter alia, audio description,\naudio/spoken subtitles, sign language and menu navigation, notably\nof electronic programme guides (EPGs).
\nThey believe that Article 7 of the AVMSD should be\nreworded in order to include stronger, binding language, requiring\nmedia service providers to ensure that their services are made\navailable to people with disabilities.
\n- Exclusive rights and short news reports (Articles 14\n& 15): Members call on the\nCommission, in its next report on the application of the AVMSD, to\nassess whether the Member States have implemented this directive in\na way that preserves the necessary and existing balance between\nsafeguarding the principle of freedom of access to information,\nespecially on events of high interest to society, and the\nprotection of rights holders.
\nWelcoming the approach taken by the Commission and the\nEuropean Court of Justice in relation to the interpretation of the\nAVMSD, they call for a continued broad interpretation of the\nterm ‘events which are regarded as being of major importance\nfor society’, including sports and entertainment events that\nare of general interest, and encourage the Member States to draw up\nlists of such events.
\n- Promotion of European audiovisual works (Article\n13): Members highlight that while\nmost Member States comply with the rules relating to the promotion\nof European works, priority is still given to national\nworks, whilst the percentage of independent works on TV\nis on the decline. They consider that the data submitted by the\nCommission in its report are insufficient for the reaching\nof suitable conclusions.
\nThey call on the Member States to take effective\nmeasures to promote better synergies among regulatory\nauthorities, audiovisual media services providers and the\nCommission, so that EU films can reach a wider audience both within\nand beyond the EU on linear and non-linear services. They also\nrecommend strengthening the role of the European Audiovisual\nObservatory, which they consider would be an appropriate\nsolution for collecting data concerning the promotion of European\naudiovisual works.
\n- Protection of minors: Members recognise the efforts made by the advertising\nindustry and members of the EU Pledge, to respond to the\nAVMSD’s call for codes of conduct for commercial\ncommunications, accompanying or included in children’s\nprogrammes, of foods and beverages high in fat, sugar and salt.\nThey stress that co-regulatory and self-regulatory\ninitiatives, particularly in the field of advertising that\ntargets minors, represent an advance on the prior situation because\nthey offer a means of reacting more swiftly to developments in the\nrapidly changing world of the media. They note, however, that such\ninitiatives may not always be sufficiently effective in all Member\nStates and that they should be regarded as complementary to\nlegal provisions in realising the aims of the AVMSD,\nparticularly in an online context.
\nThey invite the Commission to consider how the basic\nrequirements of the AVMSD applicable to non-linear services can be\nextended to other online content and services which are\ncurrently out of its scope, and what steps need to be taken to\ncreate a level playing field for all operators and call on it to\npresent to Parliament the results of its considerations no later\nthan 31 December 2013.
\n- Advertising (Article 9): Members note that the 12-minute hourly advertising\nlimit has been breached in some Member States and urge the Member\nStates concerned to implement fully, correctly and without delay\nthe provisions of the AVMSD in this respect.
\nThey also urge the Commission, while monitoring\ncompliance with existing rules setting out qualitative and\nquantitative stipulations on advertising, to have an eye towards\nfuture challenges, e.g. that of Connected TV, in terms of\nthe competitiveness and the sustainable financing of audiovisual\nmedia services.
\nMembers welcome the Commission’s intention to\nupdate its interpretative communication on certain aspects\nof the provisions on televised advertising in 2013.
\n- Media literacy: Members take note of the findings by the Commission\nwith regard to the level of media literacy in the Member States.\nThey note that access to channels, and the choice of audiovisual\nservices, has increased significantly and call on the Commission\nand the Member States to promote media literacy for all EU\ncitizens through initiatives and coordinated actions, in order\nto increase the critical understanding of audiovisual media\nservices.
\n- Future challenges: Members regret that the Commission only partially\ncarried out its reporting task in keeping with its obligation under\nthe AVMSD, and call for an interim evaluation before the\nnext Commission application report.
\nThey call on the Commission to monitor closely the\ndevelopment of hybrid services in the EU, in particular\nConnected TV, to establish in its Green Paper on Connected TV the\nvarious issues they raise and to pursue those issues through public\nconsultation.
\nLastly, Members also call on the Commission to\naddress, in particular, the uncertainties surrounding the use of\nthe term ‘on-demand audiovisual media services’ and,\nwith an eye both to greater consistency in EU legislation affecting\non-demand audiovisual services and to likely developments in media\nconvergence, to establish a clearer definition of the term\nso that the regulatory aims of the AVMSD can be achieved more\neffectively.
\nPURPOSE: to present the first report from the\nCommission on the application of Directive 2010/13/EU \"Audiovisual\nMedia Service Directive (AMSD)\" covering the period\n2009-2010.
\nCONTENT: the report comprises two parts:
\n\n· \nthe first part of the report looks\nretrospectively at the implementation of the Directive, including\nquestions about the effectiveness of qualitative advertising rules\nin a sector where the offer and individuals' response to\nadvertising are changing.
\n\n· \nthe second part addresses, in a prospective way,\nthe influence of important technological changes on the regulatory\nframework as traditional broadcasting and internet rapidly\nconverge. By the end of 2011 notifications had been received from a\ntotal of 23 Member States, twenty of which amounted to full\ntranspositions.
\nGenerally, the report concludes that the European\nregulatory framework for audiovisual media services has served\ncitizens and businesses well.
\n\n· \nFor business, it has provided the stable legal\nframework, which media service providers need to make business\ndecisions. Since its creation, the regulatory framework has allowed\nthe market to grow from a small number of service providers to more\nthan 7,500 broadcasters today. It has also enabled the development\nand growth of video-on-demand services, the estimated number of on\ndemand services in the EU amounting to at least 650 as of January\n2012. In February 20122 the number of online video-on-demand is\nestimated at 251 in the EU.
\n\n· \nFrom a citizen's perspective, access to channels\nand choice of audiovisual services has increased significantly. In\n2009, television-viewing time increased in almost all Member\nStates, with the daily average ranging from 145 minutes in Austria\nto 265 in Hungary.
\nThe Commission considers, nevertheless, that some\npoints need attention:
\nAudiovisual commercial communications: in this field, several of the issues involved should\nbe further monitored and assessed in order to strengthen the\neffectiveness of the rules having regard to their\nobjective.
\n\n· \nThe proportion of advertising and teleshopping\nspots on television may not exceed 12 minutes per hour. The\nCommission monitored advertising practices in eight Member States\nduring the reference period. In a number of Member States the\n12-minute limitation of advertising spots is regularly\nbreached. The Commission intends to continue monitoring Member\nStates' compliance with the 12-minute rule and, if necessary,\ninitiate infringement procedures.
\n\n· \nThe monitoring of advertising practices also\nrevealed a number of issues in the area of commercial\ncommunications concerning sponsorship, self-promotion and\nproduct placement. This shows a need to clarify the rules\ngoverning the various forms of commercial\ncommunications.
\n\n· \nIn the Member States monitored, alcohol\nadvertising represents between 0.8% and 3% of overall\nadvertising activity on audiovisual media services based on the\ntotal number of spots broadcast over the monitored period. Very few\ncases of clear infringements have been found. However, a\nsignificant proportion, more than 50%, of the advertising spots\ncontained elements which might be linked to some of the\ncharacteristics banned by the AVMSD, although they fell short of\nconstituting a clear-cut infringement.
\n\n· \nWith regard to advertising targeting\nchildren, content analysis of the 100 most frequently broadcast\nadvertising spots showed that the Directive’s provisions on\nthe protection of minors in advertising were seldom contravened. As\nwith alcohol advertising, because of the detailed wording of the\nrelevant provisions, there are few infringements of the AVMSD.\nNevertheless, it does appear that advertising techniques geared\ntowards minors are frequently used in television advertising. Five\nMember States prohibit advertising in children’s programmes.\nFour Member States impose a partial ban and seven Member States\nprohibit the showing of sponsorship logos in children’s\nprogrammes.
\nIn view of the above, the Commission will update in\n2013 the Interpretative Communication on certain aspects of the\nprovisions on televised advertising in the ‘Television Without\nFrontiers’ Directive. Further investigations are required to\nassess the impact of commercial communications, especially for\nalcoholic beverages, on minors as regards exposure and\nconsumption.
\nIn the more specific area of audiovisual commercial\ncommunications in children’s programmes for sweet, fatty or\nsalty foods or drinks, Member States must encourage audiovisual\nmedia service providers to develop codes of conduct regarding\ninappropriate audiovisual commercial communications in\nchildren’s programmes. The effectiveness of such codes of\nconduct must be further assessed.
\nTechnological progress: the report stresses that foreseeable technological\ndevelopments might blur the boundaries between broadcasting and\nover the top delivery of audiovisual content. As a result, the\ncurrent regulatory framework set by the AVMSD may have to be\ntested against evolving viewing and delivery patterns, taking\ninto account related policy goals such as consumers' protection and\nthe level of media literacy.
\nAs the possible impact on the market and the\nregulatory framework is not yet totally clear, a full assessment\nof the current and future situation should be made. The\nCommission launched an open debate with stakeholders about\n\"over-the-top\" delivery of audiovisual content and will deepen this\nanalysis in the coming months in view of a policy document on\nconnected TV.
\nThe Committee on Culture and Education adopted the\nown-initiative report by Jean-Marie CAVADA (EPP, FR) on the online\ndistribution of audiovisual works in the European\nUnion.
\nLegal content, accessibility and collective rights\nmanagement: the committee stresses\nthe need to make legal content more attractive, and to improve the\nonline availability of audiovisual works, including both subtitled\nworks and works in all the official languages of the EU. Digital\nservices, such as video streaming, should be made available to all\nEU citizens irrespective of the Member State in which they are\nlocated. Members call on the Commission to request that European\ndigital companies remove geographical controls (e.g. IP address\nblocking) across the Union and allow the purchase of digital\nservices from outside the consumer’s Member State of origin.\nIt asks the Commission to draft an analysis of the application of\nthe Cable and Satellite Directive\nto digital distribution.
\nThe committee suggests adopting a comprehensive\napproach at EU level which should involve greater cooperation\nbetween rights‑holders, online distribution platforms and\ninternet service providers, so as to facilitate user-friendly and\ncompetitive access to audiovisual content. It stresses the\nimportance of net neutrality in order to guarantee equal\naccess to high‑speed networks, which is crucial to the\nquality of legitimate online audiovisual services.
\nMembers emphasise that the digital divide between\nMember States or regions of the EU represents a serious barrier to\nthe development of the digital single market. They call, therefore,\nfor the expansion of broadband internet access throughout the EU\nwith a view to stimulating access to online services and new\ntechnologies.
\nOn collective management, Members call on the\nCommission to present a legislative initiative for the\ncollective management of copyright, aimed at ensuring better\naccountability, transparency and governance on the part of\ncollective rights management societies, along with efficient\ndispute resolution mechanisms, and at clarifying and simplifying\nlicensing systems in the music sector. They stress the need to\noperate a clear distinction between licensing practices for\ndifferent types of content, notably between\naudiovisual/cinematographic and musical works.
\nOn the question of convergence of the media,\nMembers call for new solutions to be found, not only in terms of authors’ rights, but also in terms of entertainment law and\nurge the European Commission to check to what extent various\nregulations for linear and non-linear services in Directive 2010/13/EU on\naudiovisual media services are still up-to-date, taking the latest\ntechnological developments into consideration. They suggests that\nconsideration be given to new forms of cross-programme and\ncross-platform clearing systems, with the aid of which interest\ncould be awoken in high-quality content, which would also increase\nthe linear programme quality and the online variety without\nburdening the revenue of private broadcasters.
\nThe report calls for an analysis of whether the\nprinciple of mutual recognition could be applied to digital goods\nin the same manner as to physical goods.
\nUnauthorised use: the\ncommittee alls on the Commission to afford internet users legal\ncertainty when they are using streamed services and to consider, in\nparticular, ways to prevent the use of payment systems and the\nfunding of such services through advertising on pay platforms\noffering unauthorised downloading and streaming services. It calls\non Member States to promote respect for authors' and\nneighbouring rights and to combat the provision of\nunauthorised content.
\nWhere legal alternatives do exist, online copyright\ninfringement remains an issue and therefore the legal online\navailability of copyrighted cultural material needs to be\nsupplemented with smarter online enforcement of\ncopyright.
\nRemuneration: Members\nmaintain that it is essential to guarantee authors and performers\nremuneration that is fair and proportional to all forms of\nexploitation of their works, especially online exploitation, and\ntherefore calls upon the Member States to ban buyout contracts,\nwhich contradict this principle. They call on the Commission\nurgently to present a study considering disparities in the\ndifferent remuneration mechanisms for authors and performers which\nare in use at the national level, in order to draw up a list of\nbest practices. Furthermore, they want the bargaining position of\nauthors and performers vis-à-vis producers to be rebalanced\nby providing authors and performers with an unwaivable right to\nremuneration for all forms of exploitation of their works,\nincluding ongoing remuneration where they have transferred their\nexclusive 'making available' right to a producer. Members maintain\nthat the best means of guaranteeing decent remuneration for\nrights‑holders is by offering a choice, as preferred, among\ncollective bargaining agreements (including agreed standard\ncontracts), extended collective licences and collective management\norganisations.
\nLicensing: the report\npoints out that multi-territorial or pan-European licensing\nmechanisms should remain voluntary and that linguistic and cultural\ndifferences between Member States, along with variations in\nnational rules unrelated to copyright law, carry their own specific\nchallenges. Members believe, therefore, that a flexible approach\nregarding pan-European licensing must be adopted, while protecting\nrights‑holders and progressing towards the digital single\nmarket. They take the view that, if sustainable multi-territorial\nlicensing can be encouraged in the digital single market for\naudiovisual works, this should facilitate market-driven\ninitiatives.
\nInteroperability: the\ncommittee calls on Member States to ensure that collective rights\nmanagement is based on effective, functional and interoperable\nsystems. It calls on the Commission to consider ways to encourage\nnetwork operators to standardise their technical tools and reverse\nthe current trend of removing responsibility from these operators\nregarding consumer protection, implementation of intellectual\nproperty rights and ensuring Internet privacy.
\nFurthermore, Members stress that consideration should\nbe given to applying a reduced rate of VAT to the digital\ndistribution of cultural goods and services in order to eliminate\nthe discrepancies between online and offline services. They take\nthe view that the application of reduced VAT rates for online\ncultural content sold by a provider established in the EU to a\nconsumer resident in the EU would boost the attractiveness of\ndigital platforms, as they indicated in their resolutions of 17\nNovember 2011 on the modernisation of VAT\nlegislation in order to boost the digital single\nmarket and of 13 October 2011 on the future of VAT.
\nProtection and promotion of audiovisual\nworks: the report calls on the\nCommission:
\n\n· \nto find mechanisms for encouraging access to\narchived audiovisual material held by Europe’s film heritage\ninstitutions;
\n\n· \nto promote solutions aimed at supporting the\ndigitisation, preservation and educational availability of these\nworks, including across borders.
\nEducation: Members\nstress the importance of promoting digital skills and media\nliteracy for all EU citizens, and also that consumers should be\nproperly informed about any issues relating to intellectual\nproperty rights that may arise when using file-sharing services in\nthe context of cloud-computing services.
\nMEDIA 2014-2020: lastly,\nthe committee stresses that it is vital for MEDIA to continue to\nexist as a specific programme focusing solely on the audiovisual\nsector.
\nThe Committee on Culture and Education adopted the\nown-initiative report by Jean-Marie CAVADA (EPP, FR) on the online\ndistribution of audiovisual works in the European\nUnion.
\nLegal content, accessibility and collective rights\nmanagement: the committee stresses\nthe need to make legal content more attractive, and to improve the\nonline availability of audiovisual works, including both subtitled\nworks and works in all the official languages of the EU. Digital\nservices, such as video streaming, should be made available to all\nEU citizens irrespective of the Member State in which they are\nlocated. Members call on the Commission to request that European\ndigital companies remove geographical controls (e.g. IP address\nblocking) across the Union and allow the purchase of digital\nservices from outside the consumer’s Member State of origin.\nIt asks the Commission to draft an analysis of the application of\nthe Cable and Satellite Directive\nto digital distribution.
\nThe committee suggests adopting a comprehensive\napproach at EU level which should involve greater cooperation\nbetween rights‑holders, online distribution platforms and\ninternet service providers, so as to facilitate user-friendly and\ncompetitive access to audiovisual content. It stresses the\nimportance of net neutrality in order to guarantee equal\naccess to high‑speed networks, which is crucial to the\nquality of legitimate online audiovisual services.
\nMembers emphasise that the digital divide between\nMember States or regions of the EU represents a serious barrier to\nthe development of the digital single market. They call, therefore,\nfor the expansion of broadband internet access throughout the EU\nwith a view to stimulating access to online services and new\ntechnologies.
\nOn collective management, Members call on the\nCommission to present a legislative initiative for the\ncollective management of copyright, aimed at ensuring better\naccountability, transparency and governance on the part of\ncollective rights management societies, along with efficient\ndispute resolution mechanisms, and at clarifying and simplifying\nlicensing systems in the music sector. They stress the need to\noperate a clear distinction between licensing practices for\ndifferent types of content, notably between\naudiovisual/cinematographic and musical works.
\nOn the question of convergence of the media,\nMembers call for new solutions to be found, not only in terms of authors’ rights, but also in terms of entertainment law and\nurge the European Commission to check to what extent various\nregulations for linear and non-linear services in Directive 2010/13/EU on\naudiovisual media services are still up-to-date, taking the latest\ntechnological developments into consideration. They suggests that\nconsideration be given to new forms of cross-programme and\ncross-platform clearing systems, with the aid of which interest\ncould be awoken in high-quality content, which would also increase\nthe linear programme quality and the online variety without\nburdening the revenue of private broadcasters.
\nThe report calls for an analysis of whether the\nprinciple of mutual recognition could be applied to digital goods\nin the same manner as to physical goods.
\nUnauthorised use: the\ncommittee alls on the Commission to afford internet users legal\ncertainty when they are using streamed services and to consider, in\nparticular, ways to prevent the use of payment systems and the\nfunding of such services through advertising on pay platforms\noffering unauthorised downloading and streaming services. It calls\non Member States to promote respect for authors' and\nneighbouring rights and to combat the provision of\nunauthorised content.
\nWhere legal alternatives do exist, online copyright\ninfringement remains an issue and therefore the legal online\navailability of copyrighted cultural material needs to be\nsupplemented with smarter online enforcement of\ncopyright.
\nRemuneration: Members\nmaintain that it is essential to guarantee authors and performers\nremuneration that is fair and proportional to all forms of\nexploitation of their works, especially online exploitation, and\ntherefore calls upon the Member States to ban buyout contracts,\nwhich contradict this principle. They call on the Commission\nurgently to present a study considering disparities in the\ndifferent remuneration mechanisms for authors and performers which\nare in use at the national level, in order to draw up a list of\nbest practices. Furthermore, they want the bargaining position of\nauthors and performers vis-à-vis producers to be rebalanced\nby providing authors and performers with an unwaivable right to\nremuneration for all forms of exploitation of their works,\nincluding ongoing remuneration where they have transferred their\nexclusive 'making available' right to a producer. Members maintain\nthat the best means of guaranteeing decent remuneration for\nrights‑holders is by offering a choice, as preferred, among\ncollective bargaining agreements (including agreed standard\ncontracts), extended collective licences and collective management\norganisations.
\nLicensing: the report\npoints out that multi-territorial or pan-European licensing\nmechanisms should remain voluntary and that linguistic and cultural\ndifferences between Member States, along with variations in\nnational rules unrelated to copyright law, carry their own specific\nchallenges. Members believe, therefore, that a flexible approach\nregarding pan-European licensing must be adopted, while protecting\nrights‑holders and progressing towards the digital single\nmarket. They take the view that, if sustainable multi-territorial\nlicensing can be encouraged in the digital single market for\naudiovisual works, this should facilitate market-driven\ninitiatives.
\nInteroperability: the\ncommittee calls on Member States to ensure that collective rights\nmanagement is based on effective, functional and interoperable\nsystems. It calls on the Commission to consider ways to encourage\nnetwork operators to standardise their technical tools and reverse\nthe current trend of removing responsibility from these operators\nregarding consumer protection, implementation of intellectual\nproperty rights and ensuring Internet privacy.
\nFurthermore, Members stress that consideration should\nbe given to applying a reduced rate of VAT to the digital\ndistribution of cultural goods and services in order to eliminate\nthe discrepancies between online and offline services. They take\nthe view that the application of reduced VAT rates for online\ncultural content sold by a provider established in the EU to a\nconsumer resident in the EU would boost the attractiveness of\ndigital platforms, as they indicated in their resolutions of 17\nNovember 2011 on the modernisation of VAT\nlegislation in order to boost the digital single\nmarket and of 13 October 2011 on the future of VAT.
\nProtection and promotion of audiovisual\nworks: the report calls on the\nCommission:
\n\n· \nto find mechanisms for encouraging access to\narchived audiovisual material held by Europe’s film heritage\ninstitutions;
\n\n· \nto promote solutions aimed at supporting the\ndigitisation, preservation and educational availability of these\nworks, including across borders.
\nEducation: Members\nstress the importance of promoting digital skills and media\nliteracy for all EU citizens, and also that consumers should be\nproperly informed about any issues relating to intellectual\nproperty rights that may arise when using file-sharing services in\nthe context of cloud-computing services.
\nMEDIA 2014-2020: lastly,\nthe committee stresses that it is vital for MEDIA to continue to\nexist as a specific programme focusing solely on the audiovisual\nsector.
\nPURPOSE: to establish the Specific Programme\nImplementing Horizon 2020 - The Framework Programme for Research\nand Innovation (2014-2020).
\nPROPOSED ACT: Council Decision.
\nBACKGROUND: designed to support the Europe 2020\nFlagship Initiative \"Innovation Union\", the basic\nprinciple of \"Horizon 2020\" is to adopt a much more strategic\napproach to research and innovation. All policy instruments and\nmeasures are designed to contribute to research and innovation and\nto develop further the European Research Area whereby knowledge,\nresearchers and technology circulate freely, and to accelerate the\ncommercialisation and diffusion of innovation across the Single\nMarket.
\nThe set consists of the proposals for:
\n\n· \na Framework Programme for\nHorizon 2020;
\n\n· \na single set of Rules for Participation and\nDissemination ;
\n\n· \na single specific programme to implement\nHorizon 2020 ;
\n\n· \na single proposal for the parts of Horizon 2020\ncorresponding to the Euratom Treaty.
\nHorizon 2020 will bring together all existing EU\nresearch and innovation funding currently provided through the\nFramework Programme for Research and Technological Development\n(FP), the Competitiveness and Innovation Framework Programme (CIP)\nand the European Institute of Innovation and Technology (EIT). The\ndifferent types of funding provided by the existing programmes will\nbe brought together into a single coherent, flexible framework,\nwhich will run from 2014 to 2020. It will provide funding for every\nstage of the innovation process from basic research to market\nuptake, in line with the EU's commitments under the \"Innovation\nUnion\".
\nIMPACT ASSESSMENT: the four proposals rely on two\nin-depth impact assessments, drawing on stakeholder consultations,\ninternal and external evaluations, and contributions from\ninternational experts. The assessments found that the Horizon 2020\noption would bring more clarity of focus, best achieve the\nnecessary critical mass of effort at programme and project level,\nand lead to the greatest impact on the policy objectives and\ndownstream economic, competitiveness, and social benefits, while at\nthe same time helping to simplify matters by easing the\nadministrative burden for participants, streamlining the applicable\nrules and procedures, ensuring consistency between instruments and\npointing to a new risk/trust balance.
\nLEGAL BASIS: Article 182(4) TFEU.
\nCONTENT: while Horizon 2020 sets out the general\nobjective of that Framework Programme, this proposal aims to\nestablish the specific programme implementing Horizon 2020 for the\nperiod from 1 January 2014 to 31 December 2020. It determines\nthe specific objectives for Union support to the research and\ninnovation activities as well as the rules for\nimplementation.
\nThe specific programme shall consist of four Parts,\nthe first three relating to indirect actions:
\nPart I “Excellent science”: this will support the activities of the European\nResearch Council on frontier research, future and emerging\ntechnologies, Marie Curie Actions and European research\ninfrastructures. These activities should aim at building competence\nin the long term, focusing strongly on the next-generation of\nscience, systems and researchers, and providing support for\nemerging talent from across the Union and from associated\ncountries. Union activities to support excellent science should\nhelp consolidate the European Research Area and make the\nUnion’s science system more competitive and attractive on a\nglobal scale.
\nA budget of EUR 27.818 billion will strengthen the EU's position as a world leader in\nscience. This will include:
\n\n· \nEUR 15.008 billion for the highly\nsuccessful European Research Council (ERC), which provides\nsubstantial grants to top-level individual researchers working in\nEurope.
\n\n· \nInvestment of EUR 3.505 billion in future and\nemerging technologies (FET) to open up new fields of research and\ninnovation.
\n\n· \nA budget of EUR 6.503 billion for the Marie\nCurie Actions to develop research and innovation skills through the\ntraining, mobility and career development of\nresearchers.
\n\n· \nFunding of EUR 2.802 billion will also be\navailable for supporting access to, and networking of priority\nresearch infrastructures across Europe.
\nPart II “Industrial leadership”:\nin order to increase the Union's industrial\nleadership there is an urgent need to stimulate private sector\nresearch and development and innovation investment, promote\nresearch and innovation with a business driven agenda and\naccelerate the development of new technologies which will underpin\nfuture businesses and economic growth. Part II \"Industrial\nleadership\" should support investments in excellent research and\ninnovation in key enabling technologies and other industrial\ntechnologies, facilitate access to risk finance for innovative\ncompanies and projects, and provide Union wide support for\ninnovation in small and medium-sized enterprises.
\nThis Part of Horizon 2020 has a budget of EUR\n27.818 million allocated as follows:
\n\n· \nLeadership in enabling and industrial\ntechnologies: EUR 15.580 of which EUR\n500 million for the EIT (including EUR 8.975.000.000 for\ninformation and communication technologies (ICT), of which EUR\n1.588.000.000 for photonics and micro-and nanoelectronics, EUR 4293\nmillion for nanotechnologies, advanced materials and advanced\nmanufacturing and processing, EUR 575 million\nfor biotechnology and EUR 1737 million for\nspace.
\n\n· \nAccess to risk finance : EUR 4.000 millions;
\n\n· \nInnovation in SMEs : EUR 700 millions.
\nPart III “Societal challenges”:\nthis Part should increase the effectiveness of\nresearch and innovation in responding to key societal challenges by\nsupporting excellent research and innovation activities. Those\nactivities should be implemented using a challenge- based approach,\nwhich brings together resources and knowledge across different\nfields, technologies and disciplines. Social sciences and\nhumanities research is an important element for addressing all of\nthe challenges. The activities should cover the full range of\nresearch and innovation with an emphasis on innovation-related\nactivities such as piloting, demonstration, test-beds, and support\nfor public procurement, pre-normative research and standard\nsetting, and market uptake of innovations. The activities should\nsupport directly the corresponding sectoral policy competences at\nUnion level. All challenges should contribute to the overarching\nobjective of sustainable development.
\nThis Part of Horozon 2020 has a budget of EUR\n35.888 million allocated as follows:
\n\n· \nHealth, demographic change and\nwell-being : EUR 9 077 million\nof which EUR 292 million for the EIT.
\n\n· \nFood security, sustainable agriculture\ndurable, marine anf maritime research and the et\nbio-economy : EUR 4 694 million of\nwhich EUR 150 million for the EIT ;
\n\n· \nSecure clean and efficient\nenergy: EUR 6.537 million of\nwhich EUR 210 million for the EIT ;
\n\n· \nSmart, green and integrated\ntransport : EUR 7.690 million of\nwhich EUR 247 million for the EIT.
\n\n· \nClimate action, resource efficiency and raw\nmaterials : EUR 3.573 millions\nof which EUR 115 million for the EIT.
\n\n· \nInclusive, innovative and secure\nsocieties : EUR 4.317 million of\nwhich EUR 138 millions for the EIT.
\nPart IV \"Non-nuclear direct actions of the Joint\nResearch Centre\" (EUR 2.210 million) has the specific objective of providing\ncustomer-driven scientific and technical support to Union\npolicies.
\nBUDGETARY IMPLICATIONS: the financial envelope for the\nimplementation of the specific programme shall be. EUR\n87.740.000.000 of which a maximum of EUR 86.198.000.000 is\nallocated to activities under Title XIX of the TFEU.
\nDELEGATED ACTS: the power to adopt acts in accordance\nwith Article 290 TFEU will be delegated to the Commission to adapt\nor further elaborate the performance indicators corresponding to\nthe specific objectives of the specific programme and the specific\nconditions for use of the finance facilities.
\nThe Committee on Industry, Research and Energy adopted\nthe report by Maria Da Graça CARVALHO (EPP, PT) on the proposal for a decision establishing the\nSpecific Programme Implementing Horizon 2020 – The\nFramework Programme for Research and Innovation\n(2014-2020).
\nThe parliamentary committee approves the Commission\nproposal subject to the following amendments:
\nExcellence, the main driver of Horizon\n2020: Members wish to stress that\nHorizon 2020 will have excellence as its main foundation, while it\npursues three priorities, namely (i) generating scientific\nexcellence; (ii) creating industrial leadership; and (iii) tackling\nsocietal challenges.
\nSpecific objectives:
\nEvaluation of the specific programme: the general performance indicators should include the\ncreation of patents and intellectual property rights (IPRs),\nthe creation of start-ups and spin-offs and the\nimplementation of research results in practice. Performance\nindicators, across all Horizon 2020 programmes, shall be published\nat least once a year and shall be constantly available to Union\ncitizens through a public website.
\nCoordination and work programmes: Members call on the Commission to ensure effective\ncoordination between the three main priorities of Horizon\n2020.
\nSMEs: Members call for\nparticular attention to be paid, when financing SMEs, to\nsimplification of procedures for accessing the funds and reporting\nobligations. At least 4% of the Horizon 2020 budget should\nbe used for an instrument dedicated to SMEs. Moreover, at\nleast 20% of the total\ncombined budget for the specific\nobjective 'Leadership in enabling and industrial technologies' and\nthe priority \"societal challenges\" should go to SMEs.
\nDelegated acts: the\npower to adopt delegated acts shall be conferred on the Commission\nfor a period of seven years from the entry into force of\nthis Decision (and not for an indeterminate period, as proposed by\nthe Commission).
\nPURPOSE: to establish the Specific Programme\nImplementing Horizon 2020 - The Framework Programme for Research\nand Innovation (2014-2020).
\nPROPOSED ACT: Council Decision.
\nBACKGROUND: designed to support the Europe 2020\nFlagship Initiative \"Innovation Union\", the basic\nprinciple of \"Horizon 2020\" is to adopt a much more strategic\napproach to research and innovation. All policy instruments and\nmeasures are designed to contribute to research and innovation and\nto develop further the European Research Area whereby knowledge,\nresearchers and technology circulate freely, and to accelerate the\ncommercialisation and diffusion of innovation across the Single\nMarket.
\nThe set consists of the proposals for:
\n\n· \na Framework Programme for\nHorizon 2020;
\n\n· \na single set of Rules for Participation and\nDissemination ;
\n\n· \na single specific programme to implement\nHorizon 2020 ;
\n\n· \na single proposal for the parts of Horizon 2020\ncorresponding to the Euratom Treaty.
\nHorizon 2020 will bring together all existing EU\nresearch and innovation funding currently provided through the\nFramework Programme for Research and Technological Development\n(FP), the Competitiveness and Innovation Framework Programme (CIP)\nand the European Institute of Innovation and Technology (EIT). The\ndifferent types of funding provided by the existing programmes will\nbe brought together into a single coherent, flexible framework,\nwhich will run from 2014 to 2020. It will provide funding for every\nstage of the innovation process from basic research to market\nuptake, in line with the EU's commitments under the \"Innovation\nUnion\".
\nIMPACT ASSESSMENT: the four proposals rely on two\nin-depth impact assessments, drawing on stakeholder consultations,\ninternal and external evaluations, and contributions from\ninternational experts. The assessments found that the Horizon 2020\noption would bring more clarity of focus, best achieve the\nnecessary critical mass of effort at programme and project level,\nand lead to the greatest impact on the policy objectives and\ndownstream economic, competitiveness, and social benefits, while at\nthe same time helping to simplify matters by easing the\nadministrative burden for participants, streamlining the applicable\nrules and procedures, ensuring consistency between instruments and\npointing to a new risk/trust balance.
\nLEGAL BASIS: Article 182(4) TFEU.
\nCONTENT: while Horizon 2020 sets out the general\nobjective of that Framework Programme, this proposal aims to\nestablish the specific programme implementing Horizon 2020 for the\nperiod from 1 January 2014 to 31 December 2020. It determines\nthe specific objectives for Union support to the research and\ninnovation activities as well as the rules for\nimplementation.
\nThe specific programme shall consist of four Parts,\nthe first three relating to indirect actions:
\nPart I “Excellent science”: this will support the activities of the European\nResearch Council on frontier research, future and emerging\ntechnologies, Marie Curie Actions and European research\ninfrastructures. These activities should aim at building competence\nin the long term, focusing strongly on the next-generation of\nscience, systems and researchers, and providing support for\nemerging talent from across the Union and from associated\ncountries. Union activities to support excellent science should\nhelp consolidate the European Research Area and make the\nUnion’s science system more competitive and attractive on a\nglobal scale.
\nA budget of EUR 27.818 billion will strengthen the EU's position as a world leader in\nscience. This will include:
\n\n· \nEUR 15.008 billion for the highly\nsuccessful European Research Council (ERC), which provides\nsubstantial grants to top-level individual researchers working in\nEurope.
\n\n· \nInvestment of EUR 3.505 billion in future and\nemerging technologies (FET) to open up new fields of research and\ninnovation.
\n\n· \nA budget of EUR 6.503 billion for the Marie\nCurie Actions to develop research and innovation skills through the\ntraining, mobility and career development of\nresearchers.
\n\n· \nFunding of EUR 2.802 billion will also be\navailable for supporting access to, and networking of priority\nresearch infrastructures across Europe.
\nPart II “Industrial leadership”:\nin order to increase the Union's industrial\nleadership there is an urgent need to stimulate private sector\nresearch and development and innovation investment, promote\nresearch and innovation with a business driven agenda and\naccelerate the development of new technologies which will underpin\nfuture businesses and economic growth. Part II \"Industrial\nleadership\" should support investments in excellent research and\ninnovation in key enabling technologies and other industrial\ntechnologies, facilitate access to risk finance for innovative\ncompanies and projects, and provide Union wide support for\ninnovation in small and medium-sized enterprises.
\nThis Part of Horizon 2020 has a budget of EUR\n27.818 million allocated as follows:
\n\n· \nLeadership in enabling and industrial\ntechnologies: EUR 15.580 of which EUR\n500 million for the EIT (including EUR 8.975.000.000 for\ninformation and communication technologies (ICT), of which EUR\n1.588.000.000 for photonics and micro-and nanoelectronics, EUR 4293\nmillion for nanotechnologies, advanced materials and advanced\nmanufacturing and processing, EUR 575 million\nfor biotechnology and EUR 1737 million for\nspace.
\n\n· \nAccess to risk finance : EUR 4.000 millions;
\n\n· \nInnovation in SMEs : EUR 700 millions.
\nPart III “Societal challenges”:\nthis Part should increase the effectiveness of\nresearch and innovation in responding to key societal challenges by\nsupporting excellent research and innovation activities. Those\nactivities should be implemented using a challenge- based approach,\nwhich brings together resources and knowledge across different\nfields, technologies and disciplines. Social sciences and\nhumanities research is an important element for addressing all of\nthe challenges. The activities should cover the full range of\nresearch and innovation with an emphasis on innovation-related\nactivities such as piloting, demonstration, test-beds, and support\nfor public procurement, pre-normative research and standard\nsetting, and market uptake of innovations. The activities should\nsupport directly the corresponding sectoral policy competences at\nUnion level. All challenges should contribute to the overarching\nobjective of sustainable development.
\nThis Part of Horozon 2020 has a budget of EUR\n35.888 million allocated as follows:
\n\n· \nHealth, demographic change and\nwell-being : EUR 9 077 million\nof which EUR 292 million for the EIT.
\n\n· \nFood security, sustainable agriculture\ndurable, marine anf maritime research and the et\nbio-economy : EUR 4 694 million of\nwhich EUR 150 million for the EIT ;
\n\n· \nSecure clean and efficient\nenergy: EUR 6.537 million of\nwhich EUR 210 million for the EIT ;
\n\n· \nSmart, green and integrated\ntransport : EUR 7.690 million of\nwhich EUR 247 million for the EIT.
\n\n· \nClimate action, resource efficiency and raw\nmaterials : EUR 3.573 millions\nof which EUR 115 million for the EIT.
\n\n· \nInclusive, innovative and secure\nsocieties : EUR 4.317 million of\nwhich EUR 138 millions for the EIT.
\nPart IV \"Non-nuclear direct actions of the Joint\nResearch Centre\" (EUR 2.210 million) has the specific objective of providing\ncustomer-driven scientific and technical support to Union\npolicies.
\nBUDGETARY IMPLICATIONS: the financial envelope for the\nimplementation of the specific programme shall be. EUR\n87.740.000.000 of which a maximum of EUR 86.198.000.000 is\nallocated to activities under Title XIX of the TFEU.
\nDELEGATED ACTS: the power to adopt acts in accordance\nwith Article 290 TFEU will be delegated to the Commission to adapt\nor further elaborate the performance indicators corresponding to\nthe specific objectives of the specific programme and the specific\nconditions for use of the finance facilities.
\nPURPOSE: to establish the Specific Programme\nImplementing Horizon 2020 - The Framework Programme for Research\nand Innovation (2014-2020).
\nPROPOSED ACT: Council Decision.
\nBACKGROUND: designed to support the Europe 2020\nFlagship Initiative \"Innovation Union\", the basic\nprinciple of \"Horizon 2020\" is to adopt a much more strategic\napproach to research and innovation. All policy instruments and\nmeasures are designed to contribute to research and innovation and\nto develop further the European Research Area whereby knowledge,\nresearchers and technology circulate freely, and to accelerate the\ncommercialisation and diffusion of innovation across the Single\nMarket.
\nThe set consists of the proposals for:
\n\n· \na Framework Programme for\nHorizon 2020;
\n\n· \na single set of Rules for Participation and\nDissemination ;
\n\n· \na single specific programme to implement\nHorizon 2020 ;
\n\n· \na single proposal for the parts of Horizon 2020\ncorresponding to the Euratom Treaty.
\nHorizon 2020 will bring together all existing EU\nresearch and innovation funding currently provided through the\nFramework Programme for Research and Technological Development\n(FP), the Competitiveness and Innovation Framework Programme (CIP)\nand the European Institute of Innovation and Technology (EIT). The\ndifferent types of funding provided by the existing programmes will\nbe brought together into a single coherent, flexible framework,\nwhich will run from 2014 to 2020. It will provide funding for every\nstage of the innovation process from basic research to market\nuptake, in line with the EU's commitments under the \"Innovation\nUnion\".
\nIMPACT ASSESSMENT: the four proposals rely on two\nin-depth impact assessments, drawing on stakeholder consultations,\ninternal and external evaluations, and contributions from\ninternational experts. The assessments found that the Horizon 2020\noption would bring more clarity of focus, best achieve the\nnecessary critical mass of effort at programme and project level,\nand lead to the greatest impact on the policy objectives and\ndownstream economic, competitiveness, and social benefits, while at\nthe same time helping to simplify matters by easing the\nadministrative burden for participants, streamlining the applicable\nrules and procedures, ensuring consistency between instruments and\npointing to a new risk/trust balance.
\nLEGAL BASIS: Article 182(4) TFEU.
\nCONTENT: while Horizon 2020 sets out the general\nobjective of that Framework Programme, this proposal aims to\nestablish the specific programme implementing Horizon 2020 for the\nperiod from 1 January 2014 to 31 December 2020. It determines\nthe specific objectives for Union support to the research and\ninnovation activities as well as the rules for\nimplementation.
\nThe specific programme shall consist of four Parts,\nthe first three relating to indirect actions:
\nPart I “Excellent science”: this will support the activities of the European\nResearch Council on frontier research, future and emerging\ntechnologies, Marie Curie Actions and European research\ninfrastructures. These activities should aim at building competence\nin the long term, focusing strongly on the next-generation of\nscience, systems and researchers, and providing support for\nemerging talent from across the Union and from associated\ncountries. Union activities to support excellent science should\nhelp consolidate the European Research Area and make the\nUnion’s science system more competitive and attractive on a\nglobal scale.
\nA budget of EUR 27.818 billion will strengthen the EU's position as a world leader in\nscience. This will include:
\n\n· \nEUR 15.008 billion for the highly\nsuccessful European Research Council (ERC), which provides\nsubstantial grants to top-level individual researchers working in\nEurope.
\n\n· \nInvestment of EUR 3.505 billion in future and\nemerging technologies (FET) to open up new fields of research and\ninnovation.
\n\n· \nA budget of EUR 6.503 billion for the Marie\nCurie Actions to develop research and innovation skills through the\ntraining, mobility and career development of\nresearchers.
\n\n· \nFunding of EUR 2.802 billion will also be\navailable for supporting access to, and networking of priority\nresearch infrastructures across Europe.
\nPart II “Industrial leadership”:\nin order to increase the Union's industrial\nleadership there is an urgent need to stimulate private sector\nresearch and development and innovation investment, promote\nresearch and innovation with a business driven agenda and\naccelerate the development of new technologies which will underpin\nfuture businesses and economic growth. Part II \"Industrial\nleadership\" should support investments in excellent research and\ninnovation in key enabling technologies and other industrial\ntechnologies, facilitate access to risk finance for innovative\ncompanies and projects, and provide Union wide support for\ninnovation in small and medium-sized enterprises.
\nThis Part of Horizon 2020 has a budget of EUR\n27.818 million allocated as follows:
\n\n· \nLeadership in enabling and industrial\ntechnologies: EUR 15.580 of which EUR\n500 million for the EIT (including EUR 8.975.000.000 for\ninformation and communication technologies (ICT), of which EUR\n1.588.000.000 for photonics and micro-and nanoelectronics, EUR 4293\nmillion for nanotechnologies, advanced materials and advanced\nmanufacturing and processing, EUR 575 million\nfor biotechnology and EUR 1737 million for\nspace.
\n\n· \nAccess to risk finance : EUR 4.000 millions;
\n\n· \nInnovation in SMEs : EUR 700 millions.
\nPart III “Societal challenges”:\nthis Part should increase the effectiveness of\nresearch and innovation in responding to key societal challenges by\nsupporting excellent research and innovation activities. Those\nactivities should be implemented using a challenge- based approach,\nwhich brings together resources and knowledge across different\nfields, technologies and disciplines. Social sciences and\nhumanities research is an important element for addressing all of\nthe challenges. The activities should cover the full range of\nresearch and innovation with an emphasis on innovation-related\nactivities such as piloting, demonstration, test-beds, and support\nfor public procurement, pre-normative research and standard\nsetting, and market uptake of innovations. The activities should\nsupport directly the corresponding sectoral policy competences at\nUnion level. All challenges should contribute to the overarching\nobjective of sustainable development.
\nThis Part of Horozon 2020 has a budget of EUR\n35.888 million allocated as follows:
\n\n· \nHealth, demographic change and\nwell-being : EUR 9 077 million\nof which EUR 292 million for the EIT.
\n\n· \nFood security, sustainable agriculture\ndurable, marine anf maritime research and the et\nbio-economy : EUR 4 694 million of\nwhich EUR 150 million for the EIT ;
\n\n· \nSecure clean and efficient\nenergy: EUR 6.537 million of\nwhich EUR 210 million for the EIT ;
\n\n· \nSmart, green and integrated\ntransport : EUR 7.690 million of\nwhich EUR 247 million for the EIT.
\n\n· \nClimate action, resource efficiency and raw\nmaterials : EUR 3.573 millions\nof which EUR 115 million for the EIT.
\n\n· \nInclusive, innovative and secure\nsocieties : EUR 4.317 million of\nwhich EUR 138 millions for the EIT.
\nPart IV \"Non-nuclear direct actions of the Joint\nResearch Centre\" (EUR 2.210 million) has the specific objective of providing\ncustomer-driven scientific and technical support to Union\npolicies.
\nBUDGETARY IMPLICATIONS: the financial envelope for the\nimplementation of the specific programme shall be. EUR\n87.740.000.000 of which a maximum of EUR 86.198.000.000 is\nallocated to activities under Title XIX of the TFEU.
\nDELEGATED ACTS: the power to adopt acts in accordance\nwith Article 290 TFEU will be delegated to the Commission to adapt\nor further elaborate the performance indicators corresponding to\nthe specific objectives of the specific programme and the specific\nconditions for use of the finance facilities.
\nPURPOSE: to establish the Specific Programme\nImplementing Horizon 2020 - The Framework Programme for Research\nand Innovation (2014-2020).
\nPROPOSED ACT: Council Decision.
\nBACKGROUND: designed to support the Europe 2020\nFlagship Initiative \"Innovation Union\", the basic\nprinciple of \"Horizon 2020\" is to adopt a much more strategic\napproach to research and innovation. All policy instruments and\nmeasures are designed to contribute to research and innovation and\nto develop further the European Research Area whereby knowledge,\nresearchers and technology circulate freely, and to accelerate the\ncommercialisation and diffusion of innovation across the Single\nMarket.
\nThe set consists of the proposals for:
\n\n· \na Framework Programme for\nHorizon 2020;
\n\n· \na single set of Rules for Participation and\nDissemination ;
\n\n· \na single specific programme to implement\nHorizon 2020 ;
\n\n· \na single proposal for the parts of Horizon 2020\ncorresponding to the Euratom Treaty.
\nHorizon 2020 will bring together all existing EU\nresearch and innovation funding currently provided through the\nFramework Programme for Research and Technological Development\n(FP), the Competitiveness and Innovation Framework Programme (CIP)\nand the European Institute of Innovation and Technology (EIT). The\ndifferent types of funding provided by the existing programmes will\nbe brought together into a single coherent, flexible framework,\nwhich will run from 2014 to 2020. It will provide funding for every\nstage of the innovation process from basic research to market\nuptake, in line with the EU's commitments under the \"Innovation\nUnion\".
\nIMPACT ASSESSMENT: the four proposals rely on two\nin-depth impact assessments, drawing on stakeholder consultations,\ninternal and external evaluations, and contributions from\ninternational experts. The assessments found that the Horizon 2020\noption would bring more clarity of focus, best achieve the\nnecessary critical mass of effort at programme and project level,\nand lead to the greatest impact on the policy objectives and\ndownstream economic, competitiveness, and social benefits, while at\nthe same time helping to simplify matters by easing the\nadministrative burden for participants, streamlining the applicable\nrules and procedures, ensuring consistency between instruments and\npointing to a new risk/trust balance.
\nLEGAL BASIS: Article 182(4) TFEU.
\nCONTENT: while Horizon 2020 sets out the general\nobjective of that Framework Programme, this proposal aims to\nestablish the specific programme implementing Horizon 2020 for the\nperiod from 1 January 2014 to 31 December 2020. It determines\nthe specific objectives for Union support to the research and\ninnovation activities as well as the rules for\nimplementation.
\nThe specific programme shall consist of four Parts,\nthe first three relating to indirect actions:
\nPart I “Excellent science”: this will support the activities of the European\nResearch Council on frontier research, future and emerging\ntechnologies, Marie Curie Actions and European research\ninfrastructures. These activities should aim at building competence\nin the long term, focusing strongly on the next-generation of\nscience, systems and researchers, and providing support for\nemerging talent from across the Union and from associated\ncountries. Union activities to support excellent science should\nhelp consolidate the European Research Area and make the\nUnion’s science system more competitive and attractive on a\nglobal scale.
\nA budget of EUR 27.818 billion will strengthen the EU's position as a world leader in\nscience. This will include:
\n\n· \nEUR 15.008 billion for the highly\nsuccessful European Research Council (ERC), which provides\nsubstantial grants to top-level individual researchers working in\nEurope.
\n\n· \nInvestment of EUR 3.505 billion in future and\nemerging technologies (FET) to open up new fields of research and\ninnovation.
\n\n· \nA budget of EUR 6.503 billion for the Marie\nCurie Actions to develop research and innovation skills through the\ntraining, mobility and career development of\nresearchers.
\n\n· \nFunding of EUR 2.802 billion will also be\navailable for supporting access to, and networking of priority\nresearch infrastructures across Europe.
\nPart II “Industrial leadership”:\nin order to increase the Union's industrial\nleadership there is an urgent need to stimulate private sector\nresearch and development and innovation investment, promote\nresearch and innovation with a business driven agenda and\naccelerate the development of new technologies which will underpin\nfuture businesses and economic growth. Part II \"Industrial\nleadership\" should support investments in excellent research and\ninnovation in key enabling technologies and other industrial\ntechnologies, facilitate access to risk finance for innovative\ncompanies and projects, and provide Union wide support for\ninnovation in small and medium-sized enterprises.
\nThis Part of Horizon 2020 has a budget of EUR\n27.818 million allocated as follows:
\n\n· \nLeadership in enabling and industrial\ntechnologies: EUR 15.580 of which EUR\n500 million for the EIT (including EUR 8.975.000.000 for\ninformation and communication technologies (ICT), of which EUR\n1.588.000.000 for photonics and micro-and nanoelectronics, EUR 4293\nmillion for nanotechnologies, advanced materials and advanced\nmanufacturing and processing, EUR 575 million\nfor biotechnology and EUR 1737 million for\nspace.
\n\n· \nAccess to risk finance : EUR 4.000 millions;
\n\n· \nInnovation in SMEs : EUR 700 millions.
\nPart III “Societal challenges”:\nthis Part should increase the effectiveness of\nresearch and innovation in responding to key societal challenges by\nsupporting excellent research and innovation activities. Those\nactivities should be implemented using a challenge- based approach,\nwhich brings together resources and knowledge across different\nfields, technologies and disciplines. Social sciences and\nhumanities research is an important element for addressing all of\nthe challenges. The activities should cover the full range of\nresearch and innovation with an emphasis on innovation-related\nactivities such as piloting, demonstration, test-beds, and support\nfor public procurement, pre-normative research and standard\nsetting, and market uptake of innovations. The activities should\nsupport directly the corresponding sectoral policy competences at\nUnion level. All challenges should contribute to the overarching\nobjective of sustainable development.
\nThis Part of Horozon 2020 has a budget of EUR\n35.888 million allocated as follows:
\n\n· \nHealth, demographic change and\nwell-being : EUR 9 077 million\nof which EUR 292 million for the EIT.
\n\n· \nFood security, sustainable agriculture\ndurable, marine anf maritime research and the et\nbio-economy : EUR 4 694 million of\nwhich EUR 150 million for the EIT ;
\n\n· \nSecure clean and efficient\nenergy: EUR 6.537 million of\nwhich EUR 210 million for the EIT ;
\n\n· \nSmart, green and integrated\ntransport : EUR 7.690 million of\nwhich EUR 247 million for the EIT.
\n\n· \nClimate action, resource efficiency and raw\nmaterials : EUR 3.573 millions\nof which EUR 115 million for the EIT.
\n\n· \nInclusive, innovative and secure\nsocieties : EUR 4.317 million of\nwhich EUR 138 millions for the EIT.
\nPart IV \"Non-nuclear direct actions of the Joint\nResearch Centre\" (EUR 2.210 million) has the specific objective of providing\ncustomer-driven scientific and technical support to Union\npolicies.
\nBUDGETARY IMPLICATIONS: the financial envelope for the\nimplementation of the specific programme shall be. EUR\n87.740.000.000 of which a maximum of EUR 86.198.000.000 is\nallocated to activities under Title XIX of the TFEU.
\nDELEGATED ACTS: the power to adopt acts in accordance\nwith Article 290 TFEU will be delegated to the Commission to adapt\nor further elaborate the performance indicators corresponding to\nthe specific objectives of the specific programme and the specific\nconditions for use of the finance facilities.
\nOBJECTIF: établir le programme\nspécifique d'exécution du programme-cadre pour la\nrecherche et l’innovation «Horizon 2020»\n(2014-2020).
\nACTE PROPOSÉ : Décision du\nConseil.
\nCONTEXTE: «Horizon 2020» est l'un des\nprincipaux piliers de l'Union\nde l'innovation, une initiative phare de la stratégie\n«Europe 2020» qui vise à renforcer la\ncompétitivité de l'Europe sur les marchés\nmondiaux. Le principe à la base du programme-cadre\n«Horizon 2020» et de ses règles de participation\net de diffusion consiste à adopter une approche beaucoup\nplus stratégique de la recherche et de l’innovation.\nL’ensemble des moyens d’action et des mesures sont\nconçus pour soutenir la recherche et de l’innovation,\nétendre l’espace européen de la recherche, qui\nassure la libre circulation des connaissances, des chercheurs et\ndes technologies, et permettre une commercialisation et une\ndiffusion plus rapides des innovations au sein du marché\nunique.
\nLe paquet de propositions relatives au programme-cadre\n«Horizon 2020» est conforme avec la communication de la\nCommission intitulée «Un\nbudget pour la stratégie Europe 2020». Il se\ncompose des propositions établissant:
\n\n· \nun programme-cadre\n(TFUE);
\n\n· \nun ensemble unique de règles\nde participation et de diffusion (TFUE);
\n\n· \nun programme spécifique unique pour la\nmise en œuvre du programme-cadre (TFUE);
\n\n· \nune proposition unique couvrant les parties du\nprogramme-cadre qui correspondent au traité\nEuratom.
\nLe programme-cadre «Horizon 2020» doit\ncontribuer à assurer la primauté industrielle de\nl’Union et renforcer l’excellence de la base\nscientifique, ce qui est essentiel pour assurer à\nl’Europe un avenir durable. Pour réaliser ces\nobjectifs, les propositions comprennent toute une gamme de mesures\nde soutien intégrées à tous les niveaux du\ncycle de la recherche et de l’innovation.
\nLe programme-cadre «Horizon 2020»\nregroupe et renforce donc les activités actuellement\nfinancées au titre du septième programme-cadre de\nrecherche, des volets du programme-cadre pour l’innovation\net la compétitivité ayant trait à\nl’innovation et de l’Institut européen\nd’innovation et de technologie (EIT). Les propositions sont\nformulées de manière à offrir aux participants\nune structure sensiblement simplifiée.
\nANALYSE D’IMPACT : les analyses d’impact ont\nconclu que l’option «Horizon 2020» : i)\napporterait une plus grande clarté quant aux objectifs\nciblés, ii) qu’elle serait la mieux à même\nde réunir la masse critique nécessaire sur le plan\ndes efforts à réaliser et iii) qu’elle aurait un\nmaximum d’impact sur les objectifs stratégiques et sur\nles avantages en aval en termes économiques, sociaux et de\nconcurrence, tout en concourant à la simplification, par\nexemple en allégeant la charge administrative pesant sur les\nparticipants.
\nBASE JURIDIQUE : articles 182, paragraphe 4, du\ntraité sur le fonctionnement de l’Union\neuropéenne (TFUE).
\nCONTENU : la décision proposée vise\nà établir le programme spécifique\nd'exécution du règlement concernant le\nprogramme-cadre pour la recherche et l’innovation\n«Horizon 2020» (2014-2020) et à\ndéterminer les objectifs spécifiques du soutien de\nl'Union aux activités de recherche et d'innovation ainsi que\nles règles d'exécution.
\nLe programme spécifique comporte quatre\nvolets, les trois premiers étant consacrés\nà des actions indirectes :
\nLe volet I «Excellence\nscientifique» devrait soutenir\nles activités du Conseil européen de la recherche en\nmatière de recherche aux frontières de la\nconnaissance, de technologies émergentes et futures et\ncelles relevant des actions Marie Curie et concernant les\ninfrastructures de recherche européennes. Ces\nactivités devraient viser à développer\nà long terme des compétences, en se concentrant sur\nla science, les systèmes et les chercheurs de la prochaine\ngénération et en soutenant les talents\némergents de toute l’Union et des pays associés.\nLes activités de l'Union en soutien à l'excellence\nscientifique devraient contribuer à consolider l'Espace\neuropéen de la recherche et à renforcer la\ncompétitivité et l'attrait du système\nscientifique de l'Union au plan mondial.
\nLa ventilation indicative du budget d'«Horizon\n2020» prévoit un montant de 27.818 millions EUR\nrépartis comme suit :
\nLe volet II «Primauté\nindustrielle» devrait : 1)\nsoutenir les investissements dans la recherche et l'innovation\nconcernant des technologies clés génériques et\nd'autres technologies industrielles : i) technologies de\nl’information et de la communication; ii) nanotechnologies;\niii) matériaux avancés; iv) biotechnologies; v)\nfabrication et transformation avancées; vi) espace ; 2)\naméliorer l'accès au capital-risque pour\nl'investissement dans la recherche et l'innovation; 3)\naccroître l'innovation dans les petites et moyennes\nentreprises.
\nLa ventilation indicative du budget d'«Horizon\n2020» prévoit un montant de 20.280 millions EUR\nrépartis comme suit :
\nLe volet III «Défis de\nsociété» devrait\naccroître l'efficacité de la recherche et de\nl'innovation face aux défis de société\nessentiels, par le soutien à des activités de\nrecherche et d'innovation. Ces activités devraient\nêtre menées selon une approche axée sur les\ndéfis à relever, en mobilisant des ressources et des\nconnaissances couvrant plusieurs domaines technologies et\ndisciplines scientifiques. Les sciences sociales et les\nhumanités sont un élément important de la\nrecherche visant à relever l'ensemble de ces défis.\nLes activités devraient couvrir tout l'éventail de la\nrecherche et de l'innovation, en mettant l'accent sur les\nactivités liées à l’innovation, telles\nque la mise sur pied de pilotes, la démonstration, les bancs\nd’essai, le soutien aux procédures de passation de\nmarchés publics, la recherche prénormative et la\ndéfinition de normes, enfin la commercialisation des\ninnovations. Les activités visant à relever tous ces\ndéfis devraient contribuer à la réalisation de\nl'objectif général du développement\ndurable.
\nLa ventilation indicative du budget d'«Horizon\n2020» prévoit un montant de 35.888 millions EUR\nrépartis comme suit :
\nLe volet IV «Actions directes non\nnucléaires du Centre commun de recherche»\n(2.210 millions EUR) a pour objectif\nspécifique d'apporter aux politiques européennes un\nsoutien scientifique et technique orienté client.
\nINCIDENCE BUDGÉTAIRE : l’enveloppe\nfinancière s’élève à\n87.740.000.000 EUR, dont 86.198.000.000 EUR au maximum sont\nalloués aux activités relevant du titre XIX du\nTFUE.
\nACTES DÉLÉGUÉS : la proposition\ncontient des dispositions habilitant la Commission à adopter\ndes actes délégués conformément\nà l’article 290 du traité sur le fonctionnement\nde l’Union européenne.
\n