The EIC and Strategic Autonomy

This week was characterized?by the importance of strategic autonomy for Europe. It was the theme of an EIT conference on Tuesday 16d (Brussels), and conversations on the 15th and 17th of May, the latter at ITF World the annual conference of IMEC (Antwerp). It was also a theme at the D66 party conference on Saturday. I will start with the latter discussion as it was a laymen discussion that helps to frame the debate. The majority of attendants at the D66 conference agreed on the statement that the EU needed to be completely autonomous (in energy, materials and food), whatever the cost to consumer. This is a totally unrealistic objective and contrary to the policy of free markets and international. A sole voice argued that it is fair to reduce dependency on some sources, but that there is nothing wrong to engage with like minded countries in the vicinity of Europe.

The latter position is closer to the position of the EU as expressed in the Critical Raw Materials Act submitted by the EU Commission to the EU Parliament and the member states. The key figures are 10% of required raw materials mined in Europe, 40% of processing of our industrial needs in the EU, 15% recycling and no more than 65% of dependancy of a material from one geographical source. These objectives are already huge, and in comparison the dreams of D66 members naive at best, totally unrealistic at worse. The investment in capacities for the objectives of the CRMA is already in dozens of billions of Euro’s. As President (in waiting) of the European Innovation Council, I am curious to know the deeptech innovation/investment needs in Europe (welcome to send in your figures with references/sources).

What is clear as well is that the magnitude of the challenge requires an excellent alignment of policies, innovation and investments. These are ideally by value chain, but without forgetting possible interactions between value chains. The example of lithium is a good example: lithium mining needs to be aligned to primary processing; cell manufacturing, battery manufacturing and automotive industry. But Lithium mining gives more side streams than mainstreams such as quartz (to silicium - which could be used to manufacture anodes in batteries), mica and feldspath and in some instance also kaolin. So the lithium mining could also give an impulse to the ceramic industry for technical use or for luxury tableware (creative industries). The current CRMA focuses on metals (and to all of them - aluminium is mentioned as the odd one out). It could also focus on bio-based materials, especially if they can replace or complement metals (e.g. composites). A more exotic opinion is that proteins are also part of the equation.

I am tempted to go into the interaction with trade policies, as dumping, subsidies may distort extraction, trade and production of raw materials. I leave that to the specialists - I have lost touch with trade policy some 15 years ago. What I found of interest is not only the scaling up of innovation, but rather the development of trans-european ecosystems in strategic industries. I am convinced that the EIT Raw Materials play its role, but when specific ecosystems are only present in selected regions a more focused instrument is needed. In semiconductors the key hubs are Leuven, the axis Eindhoven-Nijmegen-Enschede, the axis Hamburg-Berlin-Dresden and the region around Grenoble (please call if you feel forgotten). But I believe that with the excellence in STEM education in Central and SE Europe, smart hubs (e.g. in chip design) should be connected too.

When it comes to funding it is also important to build a funnel of instruments from local to multinational and from TRL 1 till TRL 11. I was pleased to attend a dinner in Brussels Monday evening to the teams of EIC and EIB (European Investment Bank) that had a two day working conference. It is essential that the different institutions and instruments of the European family are well connected with the societal objectives in one hand (public money, serves public objectives) and the customer journey in the other hand. That presents dilemma’s, but I like the motto of the dutch tax authority (modified): we can not make it easier, but we can make it relevant. The methods should serve the objectives. Strategic autonomy requires bold entrepreneurs. If it is not the established order that wishes to transform, the transformation will come from a new paradigm. New paradigm: I mean a new generation of entrepreneurs. That is where the EIC is for.????