ECA report: euro1 billion in funding for agricultural innovation falls short of targets

The European Union's euro1 billion in funding for the European Innovation Partnership on Agricultural Productivity and Sustainability (EIP-AGRI) between 2014 and 2022, considered a "key tool for innovation”, has fallen short of its targets, according to an audit report published yesterday by the European Court of Auditors (ECA).

In theory, EIP-AGRI was supposed to bring farmers, researchers and consultants together to produce concrete solutions that can be applied on farms; in practice, European auditors found that too many projects missed the very heart of innovation: the real needs of farmers.

The Court's message is stark: many of the projects supported "did not have real innovation potential or practical impact”, and results suffered because "there was not enough focus on farmers' needs and because they were not sufficiently disseminated”.

The figures are hard to ignore: out of a sample of 70 projects analysed in Spain, France, the Netherlands and Poland, more than a quarter were not even directly linked to farmers' needs, and over half failed to generate successful innovations. Only around half of the projects that tested innovative ideas actually disseminated key results, even though the obligation was clearly in the programme's architecture.

Joao Leao, the Member of the Court responsible for the audit, said: "Innovation is imperative if the agricultural sector is to improve its economic, social and environmental sustainability. The EU's tool to stimulate innovation at farm level could have delivered better value for money. Opportunities were missed because farmers' practical needs were not taken into account, even though the chances of success would have been much higher if farmers had been directly involved.”

The audit report prepared by the ECA shows that the projects with solid results had several common features: they actively involved farmers, integrated research into practical solutions and demonstrated from the design phase that they could produce useful results.

"Our audit showed what works well: high-quality innovations came mainly from projects that actively involved farmers, addressed their needs, integrated research into practical agricultural solutions and clearly demonstrated, from the start, the potential to produce useful results,” stressed Joao Leao, at the press conference held yesterday afternoon to present the results of the report.

In other words, the recipe for success was known, but it was not systematically applied.

The report also highlights a structural problem: the selection of projects. "The innovation potential was not a decisive factor in the selection of projects,” states the cited document, which mentions that certain criteria, such as the usefulness of the results or wide applicability, often played a secondary role.

• ECA accuses: Results of innovation from public money, without dissemination

In these conditions, which favored the lack of real competition for funding, and in the absence of more demanding evaluation procedures, some projects received European money despite early signals that they would not deliver authentic innovations, ECA auditors claim. They also identified situations of "deadweight effect”, i.e. investments that would probably have been made without public support, thus diminishing the added value of EU funds.

Furthermore, the European Court of Auditors experts show that only half of the projects passed on the knowledge created, and of the 18 projects that generated useful results, only 6 led to innovations that were widely adopted, so that promising innovations remained captive in narrow circles, without the multiplier effect that justifies public investments.

The European Commission, in its official responses sent to the ECA, adopts a conciliatory tone and explicitly acknowledges the validity of the criticisms. "The Commission agrees with the Court on the importance of focusing on the innovation needs of farmers and other practitioners. For projects to generate knowledge useful for practice, it is essential that farmers and relevant partners are actively involved throughout the project,” the position paper says. The European executive accepts the Court's recommendations and promises adjustments in the future Common Agricultural Policy.

Furthermore, the Commission underlines that the lessons of the audit are already integrated into the proposals for the post-2027 period. "The Commission considers that, in line with the interactive innovation model proposed for the CAP 2028-2034, an EIP-AGRI project should be based on the specific needs of farmers, forest holders and rural actors,” the position paper says, in which the representatives of the Community Executive would also mention that "the precise identification of these real needs on the ground can pose various challenges”. Regarding the risk inherent in innovation, the Commission realistically warns: "All innovation projects involve a natural risk of failure, which can only be partially mitigated and must be accepted given their trial-and-error nature”.

The financial context makes these conclusions all the more sensitive. While in the old budgetary framework the EIP-AGRI benefited from almost one billion euros, in the current MFF the allocation rises to around 1.6 billion euros, which amplifies the pressure for measurable results. At stake is not only the efficiency of spending European money, but also the capacity of EU agriculture to remain competitive in a global environment marked by climate change, cost pressures and accelerated technological transformation.