----

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the seventh framework programme of the European Community for research, technological development and demonstration activities (2007 to 2013) and the Proposal for a Council Decision concerning the seventh framework programme of the European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom) for nuclear research and training activities (2007 to 2011)’

(COM(2005) 119 final/2 — 2005/0043 (COD) — 2005/0044 (CNS))

(2006/C 65/02)

On 25 April 2005 the Council decided, under Article 95 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, to consult the European Economic and Social Committee on the abovementioned proposal.

The Section for the Single Market, Production and Consumption, which was responsible for preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 11 November 2005. The rapporteur was Mr Wolf, the co-rapporteur Mr Pezzini.

At its 422nd plenary session, held on 14 and 15 December 2005 (meeting of 14 December), the European Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 123 votes, with four abstentions:

Contents

1.   Summary and recommendations

2.   Introduction

3.   Gist of the Commission document

4.   General comments

5.   Specific comments

6.   The seventh Euratom framework programme (Euratom FP7)

6.4   Joint Research Centre – Euratom Programme

Brussels, 14 December 2005

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Anne-Marie SIGMUND

----

(1)  This also applies to the objectives of the revamped Lisbon strategy (European Council of 23 March 2005).

(2)  Total EU spending on research and development to rise to 3 % of GDP by 2010, with the private sector contributing two-thirds. See also OJ C 95 of 23.4.2003.

(3)  R&D spending by the US Department of Defence (DoD) – which covers not only military research – represents a particularly important share of these investments.

(4)  This objective was explicitly confirmed and detailed in the decisions taken by the March 2005 European Council in Brussels to revitalise the Lisbon strategy.

(5)  Examples of successful European cooperation: Ariane, Airbus, CERN, ESO, Galileo; JET/ITER.

(6)Science and technology, the key to Europe's future – Guidelines for future European Union policy to support research, COM(2004) 353 final.

(7)OJ C 157, 28.6.2005.

(8)  See footnotes 14 to 21 below.

(9)  COM(2005) 440 to 445 final.

(10)  Expected shortly.

(11)OJ C 95, 23.4.2003.

(12)OJ C 157 of 28.6.2005.

(13)OJ C 234, 30.9.2003; OJ C 61, 14.3.2003; OJ C 94, 18.4.2002.

(14)OJ C 74, 23.3.2005; OJ C 133, 6.6.2003.

(15)OJ C 302, 7.12.2004.

(16)OJ C 241, 7.10.2002.

(17)OJ C 302, 7.12.2004.

(18)OJ C 220, 16.9.2003; OJ C 112, 30.4.2004.

(19)OJ C 157, 28.6.2005.

(20)OJ C 110, 30.4.2004.

(21)  Quotation from the speech of the then German Chancellor, Gerhard Schröder. inaugurating Einstein Year in 2005. He went on to point out that ‘basic research also needs security, freedom from the pressure to deliver direct applications of its findings and the compulsion to constantly demonstrate its usefulness ...’.

(22)  cf. The Economic Returns to Basic Research and the Benefits of University-Industry Relationships. A literature review and update of findings. Report for the UK Office of Science and Technology by SPRU - Science and Technology Policy Research., Alister Scott, Grové Steyn, Aldo Geuna, Stefano Brusoni, Ed Steinmueller, 2002.

(23)  See also OJ C 110, 30.4.2004.

(24)OJ L 75, 22.3.2005, p. 67.

(25)  This applies, for instance to a failure to appreciate (a) the fact that the main purpose of research is to generate new knowledge, while the issue of what serves humanity or what is relevant to society is not an appropriate criterion in individual cases (see also OJ C 221, 7.8.2001, points 4 and 6 – point 6.7.1 for instance – and footnote 14, or (b) the key importance of duplication, not only to safeguard new knowledge but to ensure that such knowledge is circulated, built on and expanded (see also OJ C 221, 7.8.2001, points 4.7.5 and 4.7.6). Good research cannot be forced by over-narrow rules, but needs freedom in which to develop.

The most effective way to forge ahead to break new ground and achieve good results is to appoint the most successful and particularly experienced researchers to executive positions, to secure the services of and promote the best scientists, and to make sure adequate provision is made for proper equipment and research resources (critical mass). See also OJ C 204, 18.7.2000 and OJ C 110, 30.4.2004. Researchers' skills cannot be quantified or assessed in an objective way. Any judgement is bound to be subject to the discretion of their experienced peers.

(26)  Report of an Expert Panel chaired by Prof. Marimon, 21 June 2004, Sixth Framework Programme.

(27)OJ C 204, 18.7.2000 (CES 595/2000, point 9.8.4).

(28)  (COM(2005) 121 final – 2005/0050 (COD))

(29)  This recommendation concerns only the primarily sociological research on the subject ‘Science in Society’. On the other hand, that share of the budget earmarked for activities (exhibitions, museums, conferences) designed to spread scientific knowledge (‘Communicating science’), i.e. its findings and methodology, should remain in the specific programme ‘Capacities’.

(30)  See also the European Commission's magazine RTDinfo, special INCO issue, July 2005.

(31)  CESE 818/2005 fin.

(32)OJ C 74, 23.3.2005.

(33)  E.g. OJ C 241 of 7.10.2002; JO C 221 of 8.9.2005 and JO C 286 of 17.11.2005.

(34)  David Pimentel and Ted. W. Patzek, Natural Resources Research Vol. 14, No 1, 2005.

(35)JO C 120 of 20.5.2005.

(36)OJ C 294 of 25.11.2005.

(37)OJ C 241 of 7.10.2002, JO C 133 of 6.6.2003, JO C 108 of 30.4.2004, JO C 110 of 30.4.2004, JO C 302 of 7.12.2004, JO C 286 of 17.11.2005, JO C 120 of 20.5.2005.

(38)  See also: Deutsche Physikalische Gesellschaft, Sept. 2005 ‘Klimaschutz und Energieversorgung in Deutschland 1990-2020’.

(39)  This very complex issue was to some extent examined in OJ C 221, 7.8.2001, points 3.9 and section 6.

(40)OJ C 221, 7.8.2001.

(41)JO C 24 of 31.1.2006.

(42)  See footnotes to point 5.2.2.

(43)OJ C 302, 7.12.2004.

(44)  ITER will produce 500 MW of fusion power. It is the step between today's studies of plasma physics like JET and tomorrow's electricity-producing fusion power plant DEMO. It is an international project involving China, the European Union and Switzerland, Japan, Korea, Russia and the USA. It is to be constructed at Cadarache, France.

(45)  See footnote 44.

(46)OJ C 110, 30.4.2004.

(47)OJ C 133, 6.6.2003.

(48)  See previous footnotes.

----