I work as a lobbyist in EU. Here I follow the ITRE committee and I write proposals that are of interest for them. ITRE = Industry, Technology, Research, Energy

1. Jan Softa at Somerco
Date: 2013-11-15
Enhance the EC member states competitiveness
Part 12 - Research leftovers
Abstract
Anyone who has conducted research agrees that it is only a few percentages of the knowledge that ever get
presented in research papers or are developed into new products. The rest of the knowledge is research leftovers.
All projects have research leftovers -notes and test results – that could have great value and enable others to
make new connections and discoveries in their own research. In public funding these could be made available to
others after 24 month.
Background
Helping geniuses! Our slogan sums up who Somerco aims to help. Somerco are a company
that target to help researchers and innovators so that these geniuses can create prosperity and
jobs in society. In this draft, I discuss the potential in research leftovers.
Introduction
Anyone who has conducted research agrees that it is only a few percentages of the knowledge
that ever get presented in research papers or are developed into new products. It has its
natural explanation. Much of the research conducted in the beginning rarely have the quality
to be interesting. However, when a project has run for a while interesting discoveries can be
made, but are never presented or developed. A part of conducting research is being sidetracked before you focus in on and clarify your research results. These side-tracks can often
be interesting for yourself or your company in the future. Normally, these are later further
researched and/or developed into new products. However, far from all research leftovers are
used in the future by researchers, innovators or technicians. These leftovers are the focus of
this paper.
Clarification
Research leftovers constitute of (a) negative results in research, (b) side-tracks that was not
valid for the research task or the development of a specific product, (c) I will also include
interesting research discoveries that have not been patented, published or developed into
research projects or products after a few years.
What should be done with research leftovers? How can they be preserved for others?
Public funding and leftovers
Suite 177, 372 Old street, EC1V 9LT London, UK

2. Jan Softa at Somerco
Date: 2013-11-15
I believe, what companies do with their research leftovers from the projects they have funded
themselves is for them to decide. They could remain at the company or they could choose to
make them available to others.
In public funding of research most funders demand that the targets are very specific to make
it manageable to ensure the quality. This also applies to EUs framework programs. However,
in all research projects much information needs to be processed before narrowing in the
material and as mentioned above most researchers end up in side-tracks. All projects have
research leftovers -notes and test results – that could have great value and enable others to
make new connections and discoveries in their own research. As often in projects they
constitute of more than one participants. In these cases the common research leftovers could
be used by one researchers while others don’t need them. Then the simple rule say that they
are in use. However, when these research leftovers are not used and the project have received
public funding it could be made mandatory to make them available for others to get access to.
Horizon 2020 and also other public funding givers could adopt in their funding programs that
the research leftovers are made accessible at the latest 24 months after the project ended. In
this approach lays an interesting debate for what the focus of the funders should be with the
project results. Many companies, universities and research institutes and companies have the
possibility to within 24 months decide whether to continue R & D with these leftovers. SMEs
with less financial resources need to focus on what they believe are the best R & D for the
future of their company. I believe, 24 months gives the researchers, inventors and technicians
who received the funding time to reflect over what research leftovers that are valuable for
their future research and development. Up until 24 month they should either have sent in a
research paper to peer-review journals or applied for patents or funding to develop research
around these research leftovers. The rest of the leftovers could these funding programs
require to be open sourced for others to use.
Exempts
Exempts from the 24 month rule are when IP disputes and other legal concerns needs to be
considered. Also when there are government approval to consider, for drugs as an example.
Clear regulations
Clear regulations for research leftovers in public funding of projects have several benefits.
For funders it is easier to find out what has already been researched and if project proposals
are equal to prior results they can decide whether they should fund it, lower the amount of
funding or not fund the project. For academia and industry clear regulations for research
leftovers enables them to know at what time they can use these new resources in their own
research and development.
It also makes it is easier for others to duplicate their research in order to check their results
which is a very important part of conducting research. It will become easier to find out what
research methods that have been considered, if some results have been neglected and so on.
Suite 177, 372 Old street, EC1V 9LT London, UK

3. Jan Softa at Somerco
Date: 2013-11-15
In the bookshelves of project participants there are plenty of research leftovers that rarely
become developed into new research or being applied for a patent after 24 months. For
companies, universities or research institutes to get access to these research leftovers would
not only lead to a more rapid pace of research and development of products. It will also lower
expenditure for companies and make them more profitable. It could be said an increased
access to research leftovers for SMEs and large companies would enhance the
competitiveness of European companies. In the health sector, much more new advancement
can be made to benefit people, as in elderly care. In social sciences, it goes faster to tackle
societal problems and find new opportunities for how we want to shape our future. In green
technology, the development phase of more efficient products that make a greener
environment can be shortened.
How can this be solved? - Application
It is pretty straight forward that the funders could demand that those receiving funding have
to give access to the research leftovers of project they fund. My suggestion is that 24 month is
a minimum of time frame to give researchers, innovators or technicians in order for them to
decide if they should proceed with the material or not. Others may want to give a longer time
frame. The important part is that it is specified in the terms for application.
How can this be solved? - Technically
There are multiple ways to solve this technically and make simple to administrate. The use of
libraries and research databases as PubMed and EBSCO host is a natural place to store
research leftovers. The key is that it should be easy to search so anyone can make new
research discoveries and develop new products. Whether the research leftovers from public
funding should be stored on research databases that are paid-to-access or free-to-access is an
issue that could be decided before receiving public funding.
Adopt
For private funders to adopt a 24 month policy for research leftovers to be released could be
done at a Board meeting. When it concern public funding it is more to consider. Is it
applicable according to current regulation? If there are no hinder/constrains it can be easily
adopted after approval from governmental agencies. Otherwise, it should be lifted up on the
national political agenda or on the EU agenda. For EU it is relevant in several funding
programs – Horizon 2020, the grants the European Research Council gives and so on.
Yours sincerely,
Jan Softa - Somerco Research
Suite 177, 372 Old street, EC1V 9LT London, UK

4. Jan Softa at Somerco
Date: 2013-11-15
Proposals
Enhance the competitiveness of EC member states Part 1 - Designated tax to science
Enhance the competitiveness of EC member states Part 2 – Strategy to support the software
industry
Enhance the competitiveness of EC member states Part 3 – Actions to support women in ICT
Enhance the competitiveness of EC member states Part 4 – Going abroad – Competitive
assets
Enhance the competitiveness of EC member states Part 5 – Business incubators, financial
recycling and incentives into reward
Enhance the competitiveness of EC member states Part 6 – Standardization as a tool to
increase competitiveness
Enhance the competitiveness of EC member states Part 7 – Different types of innovations
Enhance the competitiveness of EC member states Part 8 – Open source from science to
society
Enhance the competitiveness of EC member states Part 9 – Crowd sourcing and crowd
funding
Enhance the competitiveness of EC member states Part 10 – Green VAT for business
Enhance the competitiveness of EC member states Part 11 - Keep talents in Europe
Enhance the competitiveness of EC member states Part 12 - Research leftovers
Enhance the competitiveness of EC member states Part 13 - Science Parks (In progress)
Enhance the competitiveness of EC member states Part 14 – Patent trolls (In progress)
Enhance the competitiveness of EC member states Overview – Old and new key areas in
order to increase the competitiveness of the industry (In progress)
Input on threats against information society
http://www.slideshare.net/SomercoResearch
Suite 177, 372 Old street, EC1V 9LT London, UK