EIC Board sets targets and urgent measures to raise participation from widening countries
- ›The EIC Board recommends increasing participation of innovators from widening countries to at least 15% across all EIC instruments, up from below 8% today.
- ›Recent steps such as the Hop On scheme and outreach have nudged application shares up but funding shares remain low at single digit levels.
- ›Concrete measures proposed include improving information, offering dedicated trainings, addressing evaluator bias and setting a minimum of 30% evaluators and jury members from widening countries.
- ›Seven widening countries had no representation in the EIC Accelerator in 2022, highlighting persistent geographic gaps in access to deep tech support.
EIC Board recommends urgent measures to boost participation from widening countries
On 1 August 2023 the European Innovation Council Board issued a statement with concrete recommendations aimed at increasing participation by high potential innovators from so called widening countries across EIC programmes. The Board set a clear numeric objective. Participation from widening countries should rise to at least 15 percent of participants across all EIC instruments. That target amounts to roughly double the current share which sits below eight percent.
What the Board says and why it matters
The EIC Board reiterated the principle of excellence as the basis for allocating EIC funding. At the same time it argued there is untapped excellence in widening countries and that systemic barriers are preventing fair access. The statement frames the increase in participation as both an equity and a strategic competitiveness issue. If the Board's reasoning is correct, greater geographic spread could expand the technology pipeline available to the EIC and support EU cohesion goals. Implementation will require practical steps to strengthen capacity and to address selection and discovery frictions.
Recent progress and persistent gaps
The Board noted recent improvements in applications from widening countries after targeted measures. However funding shares remain low and some countries are still absent entirely from key instruments. The statement mixes application metrics with funding outcomes to show progress in interest and continued shortfalls in awarded support.
| Metric | 2021 | 2022 | Target / Remarks |
| EIC Accelerator short applications (Step 1) share from widening countries | 16% | 21% | Improved, positive trend |
| EIC Accelerator full applications (Step 2) share from widening countries | 11% | 14% | Some increase but drop between steps remains an issue |
| Share of EIC Pathfinder funding received by widening countries (2022) | 8.5% | Funding share remains low | |
| Share of EIC Accelerator funding received by widening countries (2022) | 7.1% | Funding share remains low | |
| Overall EIC funding share from widening countries | Below 8% | Board target is at least 15% across EIC instruments | |
| Representation in EIC Accelerator | Seven widening countries had zero representation in 2022 |
The figures show that outreach and lower barrier entry can lift application volumes. The persistent divergence between application shares and funding shares suggests either selection filtering or a readiness gap between applicants and the assessment criteria used for awards.
Board recommendations and proposed interventions
Following its analysis the EIC Board set out a range of actions it considers urgent. The recommendations are operational and governance oriented. Core proposals include improving information flows about EIC opportunities, expanding dedicated training and coaching for applicants from widening countries, proactive matching and network building, and measures to reduce potential bias in evaluation and jury decisions. The Board also proposes a minimum representation target for evaluators and jury members drawn from widening countries.
Other recommended measures in the Board statement include targeted outreach to national actors such as Horizon Europe National Contact Points and Enterprise Europe Network partners, capacity building for applicants, dedicated training on proposal preparation and pitching, improved data monitoring and transparency on participation and awards, and continued use of acceleration and coaching services tailored for widening regions.
Practical challenges and trade offs
The Board’s goals are operationally clear but implementation will face trade offs. Raising evaluator representation to 30 percent depends on the availability of suitably qualified experts within widening countries. Rapid expansion of funded shares requires either more successful applications in competition with other applicants or ringfenced resources. The EIC must balance the goal of geographic inclusion with the legal and policy mandate to fund excellence. That tension explains why the Board emphasizes both excellence and active measures to surface overlooked talent.
Capacity building takes time and sustained investment. Moving reported application shares into equivalent funding shares will require improved investment readiness, better matchmaking with co-investors, and possibly tailored instruments that recognise systemic differences in ecosystem maturity. The recommendation to share applications with national or regional funders under applicant consent is one way to help unsuccessful applicants access alternative support.
Wider implications for EU innovation policy
The EIC Board’s statement sits at the intersection of innovation policy and EU cohesion policy. If adopted in full the measures would pull EIC activity closer to the Commission’s stated aim of spreading research and innovation benefits more evenly across Member States. Successful implementation could strengthen regional ecosystems and broaden the pipeline of investable deep tech projects for the EIC Fund and private co-investors. The converse risk is that without realistic resourcing and follow through, targets become rhetorical and fail to change outcomes.
What to watch next
Observers should track whether EISMEA and the Commission adopt the Board’s recommendations in EIC operating procedures and funding calls. Key indicators will include changes in evaluator and jury composition, the share of funding actually awarded to widening countries over time, uptake of capacity building offers such as coaching and pre-accelerator support, and whether outreach to national and regional actors results in effective co-financing pathways. Transparency in monitoring will be essential to assess whether the measures have practical impact.