Vœux 2026: Carnot, a collective momentum

2026 is shaping up to be a pivotal year for the Carnot program. How are you approaching this transitional phase?

The year 2026 represents more than just a calendar deadline for the Carnot institute network; it marks a real strategic turning point. Tackling this transitional phase requires a delicate balance between recognizing current difficulties and building a sustainable future.
The Carnot system has long been the cornerstone of partnership research in France, creating an indispensable bridge between academic excellence and industrial innovation. However, it is imperative to recognize with lucidity that this model is now "dented". Recent reforms have shaken up certainties, changed the rules and, in so doing, weakened the Carnot system's legibility. It would be a mistake to ignore this reality; this transition phase begins with an honest assessment of the risk of eroding certain gains.
Yes, we are going through a period of turbulence, but this must be seen as a phase of reconstruction. Obstacles - be they budgetary, administrative or organizational - are not dead-ends, but signals driving us forward. This transition is an opportunity to transform the constraints of reform into levers for modernization.
The Carnot story is far from over. We are not at the end of a cycle, but at the dawn of a new chapter. While the framework may be changing, the fundamental mission remains the same: to stimulate the economy through technological innovation. In 2026, the system must reinvent itself to become more agile, more responsive and even more in tune with contemporary challenges (ecological transition, digital sovereignty).
To achieve this transition, my approach is based on a triptych of values:
- Lucidity: not turning a blind eye to the weaknesses of the current system
- Combativeness: Vigorously defending the added value of our researchers and the relevance of our contract research model.
- Hope : Believe in the network's ability to bounce back and remain the preferred partner of very small businesses, SMEs and large groups.

The major challenge of 2026 will be human. My priority is to remobilize our teams and partners. A successful reform cannot be decreed from on high; it has to be implemented on the ground. We need to give new meaning to the day-to-day work of our employees, and reaffirm to our industrial partners that Carnot remains a guarantee of quality and performance. Together, we need to define the "common course" that will make partnership research the driving force behind our recovery.

In concrete terms, what does this reform change for the Carnot institutes?

In concrete terms, the reform transforms the very structure of Carnot. It moves the system from a stable, multi-year labeling model to a more demanding performance and thematic grouping logic.
This is undoubtedly the most far-reaching change for the institutes. Up until now, once they had been awarded the label, Carnot institutes benefited from visibility over several years. From now on, the scheme will be validated every year. This introduces a form of "continuous pressure" that will also complicate the management of long-term research projects, which do not cope well with annual budgetary or administrative uncertainty.
The historical architecture, based on geographically or institutionally autonomous institutes, is giving way, on the one hand, to a sector-based rationale with the establishment of national thematic consortia, and on the other, to a territorial rationale with Carnots supported by University Innovation Poles (PUI).
I'm not sure that this new scheme will make it easier for companies to understand, and it will require a considerable coordination effort on the part of the Réseau, as well as changes to internal governance, integrating both local and national issues.
Let's be honest: this framework is probably not what the players in the field would have drawn up if they had been given carte blanche. The current system is the result of budgetary constraints and the government's desire to rationalize, which can sometimes seem disconnected from the reality of laboratories. But this framework, though open to improvement, is binding on all. The challenge is no longer to debate its relevance, but to learn how to navigate within it to derive maximum benefit. This is a transitional phase in which pragmatism must prevail over nostalgia for the old model.

What do you see as the benefits and risks of this new framework?

Analysis of this new framework reveals a strong duality: it offers an opportunity to modernize the innovation landscape, while imposing budgetary constraints that could limit its real impact.
The evolution of the Carnot scheme brings benefits to the French ecosystem, in particular by broadening the network: By opening up the scheme to more players, the reform breaks down certain silos. It enables new structures to join the Carnot dynamic, enriching the global technological offering available to companies. Networking will also have a knock-on effect in terms of training and professionalization for those just starting out in partnership research, with an apprenticeship that has proved its worth in the network under the aegis of the AiCarnot association.
What's more, the fact that partnership research is at the heart of this reform confirms a growing awareness that public-private links are no longer an option, but the essential driving force behind industrial sovereignty.
On the other hand, there are a number of potential pitfalls that could hamper this dynamic if they are not anticipated:
The danger of financial "sprinkling": This is the major point of vigilance. The reform is based on constant resources. By opening up the system to more players with the same budget, there is a risk of diluting funding. If each institute receives too small a share, its capacity for investment and self-financing (the "abondement") will be mechanically reduced.
This can also lead to a lack of incentive for radical innovation: with annual validation and distributed resources, the system can become too cautious. To innovate, you need to be able to take risks over the long term. If the framework becomes too rigid or fragmented, it may no longer be strong enough to support major technological leaps.
Carnot's historic success was based on a focused, ambitious policy ("hitting hard on specific points"). By trying to cover too much ground with the same resources, we run the risk of losing the "critical mass" that was Carnot's strength.

How is the Carnot Network positioning itself in the face of these changes?

Faced with the uncertainties of reform, the Carnot Network has chosen not to be a passive observer. On the contrary, it has positioned itself as a driver of transition, with the firm intention of transforming these new constraints into a lever of influence.
Despite the changing environment, the network's determination remains intact: to continue to invest fully. The idea is not to undergo reform, but to embrace it. The network is reaffirming its role as a pivot between science and industry, maintaining its high standards and proving that the socio-economic benefits of Carnot are more relevant than ever.
The integration of new Carnots and their massive expansion can be destabilizing. The role of the network is therefore to become a facilitator of synergies ; to help each member identify its added value within the new configurations, and to transform potential competition into a collective force with a more powerful offering for industrialists.

In this new landscape, the risk is to dilute its identity. The network's mission is to defend the fundamental values that have made the label such a success:
- professionalism in contractual relations
- Responsiveness to business needs
- Applied scientific excellence
- Respect for intellectual property and confidentiality

To ensure the long-term viability of the system, which is subject to annual validation, the network adopts an offensive stance: demonstrating concrete impact (jobs created, patents filed, sales generated by partner companies). By proving that every euro invested in the Carnot scheme generates a massive return on investment for French sovereignty, the network strengthens its position vis-à-vis decision-makers.
The network's success depends on the commitment of its researchers, engineers and business developers. The network is committed to :
- Mobilize teams in the field over the long term by giving them a sense of purpose and visibility, despite the complexity of administrative procedures.
- promote partnership research as a path to excellence
- Creating a sense of belonging to a community which, though transformed, remains united by a common goal.

Finally, if you had one wish for Carnot in 2026, and even beyond, what would it be?

If I had to formulate a wish for 2026, it would be that the Carnot scheme should not simply be a label that survives a reform, but that it should assert itself as the beating heart of French technological sovereignty.

My first wish is financial realism. We can't ask the network to meet the challenges of decarbonization, artificial intelligence and reindustrialization with stagnant resources. The French government and its partners must recognize that Carnot funding is an investment, not a cost. I'd like to see resources commensurate with the stakes involved, so that we can avoid spreading them too thinly and fund breakthrough projects capable of transforming our industries.

I hope that the network will succeed in the challenge of expansion without losing its soul.
I want the Carnot of tomorrow to be more open, welcoming new talents and new disciplines, while remaining uncompromising in its standards. Scientific excellence and professionalism in contractual relations must remain our compass, whatever the size of the network.

Finally, and perhaps most importantly, my wish goes out to the men and women who bring this facility to life. May we remain a community of destiny. Despite the doubts that may arise from administrative transitions, I hope that the teams in the field - researchers, engineers, technicians, business managers - will continue to believe and fight together. Carnot's real strength lies not in its regulatory texts, but in this collective passion for useful innovation.