Executive Summary

The Swiss Science Council (SWR) published its evaluation report on Innosuisse's funding portfolio on June 4, 2026. The evaluation confirms that Innosuisse fulfills its statutory mandate and has a coherent funding portfolio. However, the SWR identifies optimization potential in the involvement of implementation partners, access to risk and equity capital, and stronger alignment of the flagship initiative with Federal Council priorities. The report was prepared on behalf of the State Secretariat for Education, Research and Innovation (SBFI).

People

  • Prof. A. Lienhard (University of Bern; External Study)

Topics

  • Innovation promotion
  • Technology transfer
  • Research and innovation policy
  • Artificial intelligence
  • Geopolitical resilience

Clarus Lead

The evaluation comes at a time when innovation is gaining geopolitical significance – particularly in key technologies and resilient value chains. While the SWR verdict validates Innosuisse's existing structure, the recommendations reveal structural gaps: Swiss innovation actors have no or only limited access to international funding instruments such as the American SBIR program or the Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA). This could jeopardize Switzerland's competitiveness in critical technology areas.

Detailed Summary

The SWR attests to Innosuisse a clear division of tasks with other funding providers such as cantonal programs, the New Regional Policy (NRP), the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF), and EU programs. The portfolio focuses on bottom-up funding, while the flagship initiative enables thematic priorities and cross-cutting topics such as sustainable development. The Federal Council can also commission Innosuisse with time-limited special programs, thematic programs, and national initiatives.

As improvement opportunities, the SWR recommends: better coordination for projects without implementation partners, simplification of barriers for implementing actors from practice, society, and public institutions, and easier access to risk and equity financing. The report identifies additional need for analysis regarding application success rates, questions of direct and individual company funding, as well as strategic assessment of dual-use and military research.

Key Findings

  • Innosuisse fulfills its statutory mandate; the portfolio is coherent and systemically well-positioned
  • Swiss innovation actors have limited access options to international funding instruments (SBIR, ARPA)
  • Recommended improvements: stronger involvement of implementation partners, better capital access, stronger alignment with Federal Council priorities

Critical Questions

  1. Evidence: On which success metrics is the assessment of portfolio coherence based? Which metrics were used to validate the "statutory mandate"?

  2. Source Validity: How representative are the external studies (Lienhard, Technopolis Vienna) for the overall assessment? Were evaluator conflicts of interest disclosed?

  3. Causality: To what extent is the lack of implementation partner participation a result of Innosuisse barriers versus lack of market interest? Which alternatives to capital financing were examined?

  4. Feasibility: How realistic is it that the Federal Council will gain access to ARPA-like programs? What risks do dual-use research programs entail?

  5. Geopolitical Dimension: To what extent does the current Innosuisse structure address strategic technology gaps (AI, semiconductors, critical minerals)?

  6. Monitoring: Which indicators will be established to verify the implementation of these recommendations?

References

Primary Source: Swiss Science Council – Innosuisse Portfolio Evaluation Report – swr-web.vercel.app/veroeffentlichungen

Verification Status: ✓ 04.06.2026

This text was created with the support of an AI model. Editorial Responsibility: clarus.news | Fact-Check: 04.06.2026