- S. 44: In general, Horizon 2020 covers topics responding to the needs of stakeholders; stakeholder only mentioned a few examples of topics not covered in Horizon 2020. However, a majority of stakeholders responding to the stakeholder consultation pointed out that Social sciences and Humanities are not sufficiently included in the calls.
- S. 44: Stakeholder position papers: Social sciences and humanities need to be better integrated in the programme design.
Some stakeholder position papers from different types of organisations mentioned that social sciences and humanities (SSH) are currently not adequately integrated in Horizon 2020 specifically in Pillar 2 and 3. Stakeholders stressed SSH have an equal capacity to solve the challenges of society today than natural sciences. In their opinion SSH needs to be better integrated from the design of work programmes, description of calls to project evaluation (i.e. ensure at least one evaluator has SSH expertise).
- S. 138f: […] The quality of SSH integration is highly uneven across projects but almost half of the projects funded under SSH flagged topics show good or fair integration of SSH in terms of share of partners, budget allocated to them, and variety of disciplines involved. Contributions from economics, sociology, political science and public administration are well integrated while many other SSH disciplines are underrepresented, especially geography/ demography and philosophy/anthropology. The low participation of the humanities and the arts remains a challenge. […]
- S. 190: Results are encouraging in terms of the integration of social sciences and humanities (SSH) in Horizon 2020, even if highly uneven across the programme.
- S. 191: Areas for improvement – deepen and broaden the embedding of SSH across the Horizon 2020 work programmes (contributions from certain SSH disciplines are relatively well-represented, while others are hardly present at all).