A EUROPEAN RESEARCH AREA
(21013)
5643/00
COM(2000) 6
|
Commission Communication: Towards a European Research Area.
|
| Legal base: |
— |
| |
| Document originated:
| 18 January 2000 |
| Forwarded to the Council:
| 24 January 2000 |
| Deposited in Parliament:
| 1 March 2000 |
| Department: |
Trade and Industry |
| Basis of consideration:
| EM of 17 March 2000 |
| Previous Committee Report:
| None |
| To be discussed in Council:
| June Research Council |
| Committee's assessment:
| Politically important |
| Committee's decision:
| Not cleared; further information requested
|
Background
12.1 The Commission analyses the current
state of European research and seeks to stimulate a debate on
what should be done about it. It describes the situation as "worrying"
and concludes that there is a lack of a European policy
on research. National and Union research policies overlap without
forming a coherent whole. A broader approach is needed, particularly
with enlargement in mind. A Europe of 25 or more countries will
not be able to operate with the methods used so far. Action must
be taken urgently.
The Commission's analysis
12.2 Europe does not make the best use of
its scientific potential, yet research is important for job creation
in the longer term. There is a need to build on existing research
efforts if Europe is to remain globally competitive, the Commission
says, and provides statistics to show the current position of
the EU relative to the US and Japan, and of the Member States
relative to one another. These highlight the extent to which the
EU is underinvesting and to which European research is understaffed,
employing few researchers in comparison with the United States
and Japan. We reproduce a few of the tables and graphs from the
document below.
12.3 Some of the elements which make this
a gloomy picture are:
- the average research effort stands at 1.8% of
EU GDP, though differences between Member States are significant.
The figure for the United States is 2.8%, and 2.9% for Japan;
- the gap is increasing, with the difference between
the EU and the US in total expenditure amounting to 60 billion
euro in 1998, as against 12 billion in 1992;
- the trade gap in 'high tech' products is increasing;
and
- the number of degree-level European students
in the United States is twice as high as that of American students
in Europe, and 50% of Europeans studying for doctorates stay on
in the US, some for ever.
12.4 However, the Commission says:
"... research
and technology account for 25 to 50% of economic growth and have
a strong influence on competitiveness and employment and the quality
of life of Europeans. If technological progress creates the jobs
of tomorrow, it is research which creates the jobs of the day
after tomorrow."
12.5 The image that Europeans have of science
is less positive than it was. It seems to inspire as much anguish
as hope. Yet Europe produces a third of the world's scientific
knowledge and is in the forefront in some areas, such as medical
research and chemistry.
Suggestions for action
12.6 The financial instrument for implementing
the EU's research policy is the Fifth Framework Programme for
Research and Technological Development (RTD) (1998-2002)[37].
The form and content of the Sixth Framework Programme (FP6) will
have to be thoroughly rethought. Meanwhile, the Commission says:
"The full panoply of
instruments available to the Union should be brought into play;
"— practical instruments, such as
databases and information systems;
"— structures and mechanisms of exchange
of information and experience: working groups, networks of experts
and operators;
"— financial instruments;
"— legal instruments, Regulations
and Directives;
"— policy co-ordination instruments,
making for a genuine political debate and culminating in recommendations
or resolutions from the Council.
"The range of possibilities provided by the
Treaty (joint ventures, supplementary programmes, participation
in national programmes, in particular) should be re-examined."
12.7 The approach taken in the employment
sector, based on guidelines, national plans of action and presentation
of joint reports on implementation, could be taken as a model,
the Commission suggests.
A European Research
Area (ERA)
12.8 This concept, advocated by the new
Commissioner for Research, Philippe Busquin, is for a more coherent
approach to RTD to overcome the current fragmentation and duplication
of effort in Europe. A number of suggestions are made in the Communication
for creating this area. The Commission recognises that
"EU programmes contribute
only 5.4% of the total public R&D expenditure, so that a European
policy must be based on the principles of 'subsidiarity', (that
measures must be taken at the level where they will be most effective)
and [provide] 'European added value' (concentration on action
which is best performed at a European level)."
12.9 Part of the Commission's argument is
that Europe needs to move beyond the current static structure
of "15+1" (15 national programmes + 1 EU) towards a
configuration in which the Member States and the Commission work
jointly to ensure that RTD contributes to the achievement of a
knowledge economy in Europe.
12.10 A list of actions proposed is annexed
to the document. These are summarised by the Minister for Science,
Energy and Industry at the Department of Trade and Industry (Lord
Sainsbury) in his Explanatory Memorandum of 17 March:
"The Communication outlines
19 specific themes for action under 7 headings which encompass
a very broad range of R&D issues at a high level. Of these
themes, some of the more important potential elements in ERA are
seen by the Commission to include:
"— the creation of a frontier-free
area for research;
"— networking of centres of excellence;
"— developing a European approach to large research
infrastructures;
"— action on patents;
"— easier access to risk capital;
"— better co-ordination of research between Member
States;
"— encouraging the mobility of researchers;
"— the Commission playing a rôle as co-ordinator
and catalyst; and
"— Member States to open up their national research
programmes to non-nationals."
The Government's view
12.11 Commenting on the Communication, the
Minister says that it will provide a timely stimulus to the debate
on the development of the Sixth Framework Programme and on the
longer term issues facing European science and innovation policy.
The Government, he says,
"... agrees that to
enjoy fully the benefits of the knowledge economy, we will need
to promote excellence in European R&D and its exploitation
by European-based companies."
12.12 He adds:
"There are some themes,
notably greater mobility of young EU researchers and networking
of centres of excellence, whose high profile in the Communication
is fully consistent with UK policy.
" The Communication also indicates development
of the Commission's analysis with respect particularly to the
rôle of basic research and to co-operation in science policy-making
between Member States (especially in the development of large
facilities). It is premature to take a firm position on any of
these suggestions until their practical application becomes clearer
through the on-going discussion and debates. In any case, if and
when any of these suggestions become formal proposals, they will
be the subject of future Explanatory Memoranda."
Consultation
12.13 The Commission has placed the Communication
on the Internet and invited comments. The DTI's Office of Science
and Technology is running a public consultation on the Sixth Framework
Programme and the future direction of European research.
Conclusion
12.14 The Minister has provided us with
a sound Explanatory Memorandum which gives us the information
which we need at this stage of the consultation. We just regret
that it arrived too late for our consideration before the Lisbon
Summit on Employment, to which the Commission expected to present
the Communication. It was adopted by the Commission in mid-January
but not deposited until 1 March 2000. We ask the Minister to explain
this delay.
12.15 The Communication is intended to
stimulate debate and we should be interested to see any formal
response to it from the Government. We note that the Minister
believes that the Communication is timely in relation to development
of the Sixth Framework Programme. We ask him what scope the Government
believes that there is to bring other instruments into play, as
the Commission suggests.
12.16 We also ask the Minister to report
to us on the outcome of the informal debate on the Communication
by Research Ministers in March and to provide us with an Explanatory
Memorandum on the areas of work on which the Commission is expected
to seek the Council's assent, in good time for us to consider
it before the June Research Council. Meantime, we shall not clear
this document.
37 Official Report: European Standing Committee
B Fifth Framework Programme for Research and Technological
Development , 5 November 1997; and (18822) - ; see HC 155-xvi
(1997-98), paragraph 12 (11 February 1998). Back
| 
