SECOND REPORT
25 February 1997
By the Select Committee appointed
to consider Science and Technology.
ORDERED TO REPORT
EU FRAMEWORK PROGRAMME
FOR EUROPEAN RESEARCH AND
TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT
CHAPTER 1 EU RESEARCH POLICY
INTRODUCTION
1.1 The Framework Programme
for European Research and Technological Development is the European
Union's five-year plan for expenditure on research and related
activities. It embraces research to underpin EU policies, and
research for the general good. Some of the research is carried
out "in-house" in the EU's Joint Research Centre (JRC),
and some is put out to competition between groups of researchers
from around Europe; it is a fundamental condition that each group
must include researchers from at least two different Member States
of the EU. The Fourth Framework Programme (FP4), 1994-98, is
now over half way through; it costs around 3,500 MECU (£2,520m)
per year, around 4 per cent of the total EU budget (Q 323).
The United Kingdom's notional contribution to the cost of FP4
is £391m for 1996-97; this may be compared with total planned
Government spending on civil science and technology (including
FP4) in 1996-97 of £3,785m. The Fifth Framework Programme
(FP5) is now under negotiation.
1.2 If industrial competitiveness
and the quality of life are to improve across the European Union,
this will depend, as much as upon anything else, on scientific
research and technological development. The record of the United
Kingdom in research is an enviable one; our record in development
and taking discoveries to market is perhaps less to be envied.
The present and future shape of the Framework Programmes are
therefore very important for the United Kingdom.
1.3 Research and development
are central to industrial competitiveness. Europe's competitors,
Japan and the USA, have acknowledged this by announcing increases
in their public research budgets. The Commission's thoughtful
working paper, Towards FP5: Additional material for the Policy
Debate (p 12), concludes that "Given this outlay
by our competitors/partners, we must ensure a substantial rate
of investment in public and private research spending in Europe."
1.4 United Kingdom
researchers have been keen participants in the Framework Programmes.
In FP3 (1990-94), the United Kingdom produced more participating
research teams than any other Member State (H.C. Deb. 31 January 1997
col. WA 414), and in the main areas of FP4 United Kingdom
research teams are involved in over 75 per cent of projects
(p 2).
1.5 Whether the United
Kingdom gets out of the Framework Programmes more than she puts
in is difficult to say. This is partly because the Commission
publishes no figures to show receipts by each Member State, and
partly because the nature of collaborative research is such that
any such figures would be misleading. The Rt Hon William
Waldegrave MP, then Minister for Science, told this Committee
in 1993, "We do rather well. We do not talk juste retour[1]
in this programme but we actually do better than juste retour,
in terms of the money that goes in through the Brussels mechanism
and wins more jobs for British scientists than "technically"
it should".[2]
In evidence to this inquiry, the OST explained the difficulty
of calculating a United Kingdom "balance" on Framework
funding (pp 5-6). They concluded, "Estimates suggest
that currently UK receipts are of the same order of magnitude
as the UK's contribution to that part of the overall budget that
is available to Member States" (i.e. not counting the ring-fenced
budget of the JRC-see below).
1.6 The Committee last
addressed the issue of European research in its report on the
European Community Fourth Framework Programme for R&D
in 1993.[3]
Since that time a number of significant changes have occurred
which are relevant to the funding and organisation of research
at both the national and European Union (EU) level. In the United
Kingdom the Office of Science and Technology has lost Departmental
status and been moved to the Department of Trade and Industry
(DTI); the Technology Foresight exercise has attempted to put
a focus on research priorities in many sectors; and there has
been a series of major reviews of Public Sector Research Establishments
(the `Prior Options Reviews'). In Europe the number of EU Member
States has increased to 15, with more countries keen to join;
Mme Edith Cresson is now the Commissioner for research, education
and training, and Professor Jorma Routti has succeeded Professor Paolo
Fasella as Director-General of Directorate-General XII (DG XII).[4]
European Union research priorities have also taken a new direction
with, for example, a strong emphasis being given to the development
of an information society; FP4 is halfway through, and negotiations
are beginning on FP5. This report is a contribution to the debate
on FP5.
FRAMEWORK PROGRAMMES
1.7 EU research policy
is intended to promote the international competitiveness of European
industry, to complement Member States' national research efforts
and to support other EU policies. It is founded on Articles 130f-p
of the Treaty of Rome, inserted in 1987 as part of the Single
European Act and expanded as part of the Maastricht Treaty in
1992. It is subject to the principle of subsidiarity.[5]
1.8 EU research policy
is implemented through research programmes which bring together
companies, universities and research centres from different European
countries in joint research projects. The research themes covered
are defined in multi-annual Framework Programmes.[6]
The Framework Programmes evolved from an EEC decision in 1984
to improve the co-ordination of its research initiatives. Activities
in the nuclear sector, including research into nuclear fusion
at the Joint European Torus (JET), are covered by the parallel
EURATOM framework programme; the two Framework Programmes are
legally distinct, but are generally spoken of as one, and are
so referred to in this report.
1.9 There have so far
been four Framework Programmes, as follows:
Framework Programmes 1-4
| | MECU
| £m*
|
| FP1 |
1984-87 |
3750 |
2212 |
| FP2 |
1987-91 |
5396 |
3777 |
| FP3 |
1990-94 |
6600 |
4686 |
| FP4 |
1994-98 |
12300 |
9594 |
* At mean exchange rate of
first year.
1.10 The Parliamentary
Office of Science and Technology (POST) has analysed the changing
priorities of the first four Framework Programmes.[7]
Energy (nuclear and non-nuclear) was the major theme of FP1,
but has received a declining proportion of the Programmes which
followed, whose dominant theme has been information technology.
The increasing budget of successive Programmes is due partly
to activities which were carried on outside one Framework being
brought within the scope of the next; but, even comparing like
with like, FP4's budget is 150 per cent of FP3's.
1.11 The three objectives
of FP4 are:
-- to develop
scientific and technological excellence in Europe, with the aim
of responding to the needs of industry and improving the quality
of life in the Member States;
-- to promote
scientific and technological cooperation in Europe; to improve
the coordination of research efforts undertaken by the Member
States and to exploit the results of research projects;
-- to contribute
to the implementation of other Community policies (environment,
transport, etc).[8]
1.12 FP4 consists of
15 specific research programmes, support for the Joint Research
Centre (JRC) (see below) and a number of other activities which
are listed below. The initial budget for FP4 was 12,300 MECU;
it was increased by 800 MECU on the accession of Austria,
Finland and Sweden. There was provision for a further 700 MECU
in 1996; in the event the Council of Ministers agreed to an increase
of just 100 MECU in December 1996; this has still to be approved
by the European Parliament. The current total budget for FP4
is therefore 13,200 MECU (£9,504m at the current rate).
According to the OST, FP4 represents around 4 per cent of
the total EU Budget; it is equivalent to about 3 per cent
of the aggregate public and private sector R&D investment
of individual Member States in 1993, or about 9 per cent
of their total non-business R&D investment in 1993 (p 1).
1.13 The United Kingdom's
notional contribution to FP4 for 1996-97 (notional, because Member
States' contributions to the EU budget are not formally subdivided)
is £391 million. This is approximately the same as
the gross funding from the Government's Science Budget for the
Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC)[9];
it is about 6.5 per cent of total planned United Kingdom
Government expenditure on science (£5973m), or 10.3 per
cent if defence research (£2188m) is excluded (pp 1
and 210).
Component Parts of FP4
| ACTIVITY
| ACRONYM
| MECU1
| £m2
|
| Telematics
| TAP |
898 |
647 |
| Communication technologies
| ACTS |
671 |
483 |
| Information technologies
| IT |
2057 |
1481 |
| Industrial and material technologies
| IMT |
1818 |
1309 |
| Measurements and testing
| SMT |
307 |
221 |
| Environment and climate
| | 907
| 653
|
| Marine sciences and technologies
| MAST III
| 243
| 175
|
| Biotechnology
| BIOTECH
| 588
| 423
|
| Biomedicine and health
| BIOMED |
356 |
256 |
| Agriculture and fisheries
| FAIR |
728 |
524 |
| Non-nuclear energy
| JOULE-THERMIE
| 1067
| 768
|
| Transport
| | 256
| 184
|
| Targeted Socio-Economic Research
| TSER |
147 |
106 |
| Co-operation with non-Member States and international organisations
| INCO |
575 |
414 |
| Dissemination and optimisation of results
| INNOVATION
| 352
| 253
|
| Stimulation of the training and mobility of researchers
| TMR |
792 |
570 |
| Nuclear fission safety (EURATOM)
| NFS |
441 |
318 |
| Controlled thermonuclear fusion (EURATOM)
| FUSION |
895 |
644 |
1 Values
after accession of Austria, Finland and Sweden
2 At
current rate
1.14 Although FP4 is
only at its mid-way point, and much of the research that it is
supporting has only begun very recently, planning for FP5 is already
well under way. Inventing Tomorrow, published by the Commission
in July 1996, was of the nature of a Green Paper on FP5. It proposed
a slight change of direction, beyond "technical achievement"
towards "meeting basic economic and social needs"; this
would mean involving end-users in project design, putting more
into demonstration, and giving more encouragement to exploitation.
It set three "general parameters": time from research
to market, which is getting shorter, blurring the boundaries between
"basic" and "applied", "pre-competitive"
and "near-market"; subsidiarity; and budgetary efficiency
in the run-up to EMU. It laid down various "requirements"
for EU research: to satisfy the expectations of the public; to
improve employment and competitiveness; to push back the frontiers
of knowledge through world-class science; and to improve the general
climate for research and the partnerships between science, industry
and the public.
1.15 According to Inventing
Tomorrow, FP4 was "proving extremely attractive",
with numerous projects and participants, and indeed as a consequence
a high and rising failure rate for proposals. Member States and
others commended the Framework Programmes not only for particular
successful projects, but also for their contribution to networking
and mobility of researchers. However, "Merely continuing
FP4 would not be appropriate"; FP5 must be more focused,
concentrating on topics which matched the concerns of Europe as
a whole and the activities of the EU, while including some new
themes.
1.16 For the actual
content of FP5, Inventing Tomorrow proposed just three
priority topics:
-- life
sciences and the environment;
-- the "information
society"; and
-- sustainable
growth in fields including products and services, energy, transport,
agriculture and fisheries.
1.17 It also proposed
three "horizontal activities" partly interwoven with
the priority topics:
-- "improving
human potential", embracing training, mobility and networks
of scientists, socio-economic research and foresight;
-- encouragement
of innovation, targeting smaller firms; and
-- involvement
of researchers from non-Member States.
1.18 Inventing Tomorrow
committed the Commission to improved procedures for FP5: fewer
programmes and committees, scope for adjustments as needs and
opportunities change during the life of a programme, simpler internal
processes and contract procedures, shorter deadlines for selection,
contracting and payment, more transparent criteria for selection,
continuous monitoring, and a means of dialogue with participants
(possibly via the Internet). It also envisaged greater flexibility
by means of generic technology programmes and task forces (see
below). It concluded by inviting discussion. Inventing Tomorrow
was presented to the Council of Research Ministers on 7th October
1996.
1.19 In November, the
Commission issued a Working Paper, Towards FP5: Additional
material for the policy debate ("Towards FP5":
COM(96)595, ISBN 9278-11892-3). It proposed criteria for selection
of programmes within each topic: need, opportunity, and above
all "high European value added". Programmes proposed
to be carried over from FP4 would be assessed for both outcomes
and continuing justification. Co-ordination would be improved
on three levels: within the Framework Programme; with other EU
policies, especially the Structural Funds and the programmes of
assistance for non-Member States; and with national programmes.
Flexibility during the course of FP5 would be improved by continuing
foresight, annual adjustment of programmes, and a small "free
space" or contingency fund (see p 128). Oversubscription
would be reduced by focusing the programmes, advertising their
intended content more clearly, and pre-screening. On the crucial
question of quantum, Towards FP5 made no bid, beyond citing
significantly the current rise in public sector R&D spending
in Japan and the USA. Towards FP5 was presented to the
Council of Research Ministers on 5th December 1996.
1.20 In February, the
Commission issued a further Working Paper, Towards FP5: Scientific
and Technological Objectives ("Towards FP5 2").
The full text is printed in the volume of evidence accompanying
this report (p 223).
1.21 Under each of
the priority topics, or "thematic programmes", proposed
in Inventing Tomorrow, Towards FP5 2 proposes
a set of "Key Actions", as follows:
(a) Unlocking the
resources of the living world and the ecosystem
-- Health
and food (including food safety and nutrition)
-- Control
of viral and infectious diseases (including AIDS)
-- The "cell
factory" (i.e. biotechnology)
-- Management
and quality of water (both ground and surface)
-- Environment
(including pollution, radiation, toxic substances and climate
change) and health
-- New rural
and coastal areas (i.e. agriculture and fisheries)
(b) Creating a
user-friendly information society
-- Services
for the citizen (IT applications for education and training; health
services; the old and the disabled; access to public services;
environmental management; and transport management)
-- Electronic
trade and new methods of work (including payment systems and security)
-- Multimedia
contents (i.e. electronic publishing, language systems, information
management)
-- Essential
technologies and infrastructures
(c) Promoting competitive
and sustainable growth
-- Products,
processes, organisation (for efficient and sustainable industry)
-- Sustainable
mobility and intermodality (i.e. transport)
-- New perspectives
in aeronautics
-- Marine
technologies (ships; marine energy and minerals)
-- Advanced
energy systems and services (including nuclear fusion)
-- The city
of tomorrow (including urban transport, construction, conservation
and social organisation)
1.22 To complement
and support the Key Actions, each thematic programme is also to
embrace "general activities for the development of generic
technologies and basic research". In "The living world",
the priorities for these general activities are to be ageing,
degenerative diseases including cancer, genetic disorders; genome
research and neuroscience; health systems, safety at work, drug
abuse, bioethics; global change; and satellite observation. For
"The information society", the general activities will
involve technologies for data creation, representation and manipulation;
virtual reality; quantum, photonic and bioelectronic technologies
for large-scale integration; high-performance computers, and super-intelligent
networks. The general activities under "Competitive and
sustainable growth" are to include new materials; standards,
measurement and fraud prevention; and nuclear safety.
1.23 Each thematic
programme is also to make more provision than in FP4 for support
for research infrastructure: large facilities, networks and centres
of excellence. For "The living world", these will include
biological collections and clinical testing centres; for "The
information society", advanced high-flow electronic networks;
and for "Competitive and sustainable growth", computing
centres and databases, wind tunnels and test laboratories.
1
The concept, frowned upon by the Community-minded, that what a
Member State gets out of an EU programme should bear some relation
to what it puts in. Back
2
Science and Technology White Paper,
8th Report 1992-93, HL Paper 106, Q 29. Back
3
European Community Fourth Framework Programme for R&D,
House of Lords Select Committee on Science and Technology 1st
Report, HL Paper 5, Session 1993-94, ISBN 010-400594-7. Back
4
DGXII is the Directorate-General of the European Commission with
responsibility for Science, Research and Development. Professor
Fasella was the head of DGXII for 14 years until January 1996. Back
5
"The Community shall act within the limits of the powers
conferred upon it by this Treaty and of the objectives assigned
to it therein. In areas which do not fall within its exclusive
competence, the Community shall take action, in accordance with
the principle of subsidiarity, only if and in so far as the objectives
of the proposed action cannot be sufficiently achieved by the
Member States and can therefore, by reason of the scale or effects
of the proposed action, be better achieved by the Community.
Any action by the Community shall not go beyond what is necessary
to achieve the objectives of this Treaty." Treaty of Rome
as amended, Article 3B. Back
6
An excellent review of the first four Framework Programmes is
presented in POST, pp 9ff. Back
7
POST 3.6. Back
8
Research and Technology: FP4
(1994-98) European Commission, 1995. Back
9
£386m: Allocation of the Science Budget 1997-98, Department
of Trade and Industry, 15 January 1997. Back
