On 25 March 2026, the Scientific Council of the European Research Council published a white paper Widening excellence. Bridging the ERC gap for a truly pan-European Research Area. The document analyses the structural factors behind the lower success rates of researchers from widening countries—EU Member States with comparatively lower levels of investment in research, including Poland—in ERC calls. It also formulates recommendations for governments, research funding bodies, the research community and the ERC itself. The authors emphasise that the ERC’s core principle remains unchanged: projects are selected exclusively on the basis of scientific excellence.
Persistent imbalance
Widening countries account for approximately one quarter of the EU population but receive only 5% of ERC grants. In 2024, researchers from widening countries submitted 940 proposals, compared with more than 7,200 from other countries. Although success rates have gradually improved—from 3% under the 7th Framework Programme to 6% under Horizon 2020 and 8% under Horizon Europe—they remain significantly below the European average of 10%, 12% and 14% respectively for the same periods. A further indication of this gap is that, under Horizon 2020, 56% of proposals from widening countries received the lowest score at the first stage of evaluation, compared with 30% for other countries. The authors attribute this disparity to structural factors, including lower levels of investment in research, insufficient institutional support for applicants, limited integration into international research networks, and linguistic and psychological barriers—including concerns about reputational risk associated with unsuccessful applications.
The Role of NCN
The white paper presents NCN as an example of a targeted institutional response to these challenges. Poland is among more than ten widening countries that have established national agencies funding basic research since 2007, drawing on the ERC model. NCN began its operations in 2011, with the ERC serving as a key reference point.
Poland also participates in the ERC Mentoring Initiative, which connects prospective applicants with experienced grant recipients and former members of ERC panels. NCN-funded projects grantees can benefit from individual consultations with mentors, covering project analysis, guidance on the proposal development and recommendations for further steps. The programme is coordinated by the NCBR National Contact Point, and involves four institutions: the National Science Centre (NCN), the National Centre for Research and Development (NCBR), the Foundation for Polish Science, and the Polish National Agency for Academic Exchange (NAWA). The authors also highlight Poland as one of the widening countries with the highest number of experts serving on ERC grant panels.
Data collected by NCN indicate that nearly all ERC grantees working in Poland have previously benefited from NCN funding, received the NCN Award or served on ERC grant panels. This suggests that the national system for funding basic research plays functions as a genuine preparatory stage in the process of applying for European grants.
Islands of excellence and the Czech example
The authors note that clear islands of excellence can be identified within the widening countries. For example, researchers from Hungary achieved a 22% success rate in the Neuroscience panel, while researchers from the Czech Republic reached 11% in the Computer Science and Informatics and Cell Biology panels. The Czech example is particularly striking: in the 2024 ERC Consolidator Grant call, Czech researchers achieved the highest success rate in Europe. The authors link this outcome to a grassroots mentoring programme launched in 2010 on the researchers’ own initiative, offering workshops, mock interviews and one-to-one mentoring well in advance of the submission deadline. Of the 45 Czech ERC grantees funded under Horizon Europe, 34 had previously participated in this programme. The authors recommend this model to other widening countries.
Direction of change
A key condition for improving results in ERC calls is higher national investment in research, including—as identified by the authors as a separate recommendation—increased funding for basic research. The authors document a strong correlation between R&D expenditure and the number of ERC grants obtained. Countries such as Sweden, Austria and Germany allocate around 3% of their GDP to research, while most widening countries spend below 2%, and Slovakia, Bulgaria, Latvia and Romania below 1%. No country in Central and Eastern Europe has yet reached the EU target of 3% of GDP; only Slovenia and the Czech Republic have exceeded 2%. R&D expenditure in this part of Europe is, on average, half the level observed in Northern and Western Europe.
The authors also recommend more effective use of cohesion funds—EU funds aimed at reducing development disparities between regions—to finance ERC projects that have successfully passed evaluation but did not receive funding due to budget limitations. The scale of this phenomenon is significant: in 2025, 69 projects from widening countries reached the second stage of evaluation but did not receive funding, although they could potentially have been supported under the European Regional Development Fund. So far, only Lithuania and Latvia have made use of this possibility. The authors also call for reforms of research evaluation and career progression systems, as well as for the development of stable career paths for researchers. The ERC announces closer dialogue with national research funding organisations and ministries, as well as the expansion of mentoring programmes.
The full text of the white paper is available on the ERC website.