----

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Communication from the Commission: Science and technology, the key to Europe's future — Guidelines for future European Union policy to support research’

(COM(2004) 353 final)

(2005/C 157/20)

On 17 June 2004, the European Commission decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under Article 262 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the abovementioned communication.

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 10 November 2004. The rapporteur was Mr Wolf.

At its 413th plenary session of 15 and 16 December 2004 (meeting of 15 December) the European Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 83 votes to three with one abstention:

1.   Introduction

2.   The Commission communication

3.   The Committee's general comments

4.   Specific comments by the Committee

5.   Summary

Brussels, 15 December 2004.

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Anne-Marie SIGMUND

----

(1)  ERA: European Research Area. For further details, see in particular OJ C 110, 30.4.2004 (CES 319/2004) and OJ C 95, 23.4.2003 (CESE 288/2003).

(2)  At the March 2002 Barcelona European Council, the European Union set itself the objective of increasing overall European research spending with the aim of approaching 3 % of EU GDP by 2010. Two-thirds of this investment should come from the private sector and one-third from the public sector (the EU and its Member States). See also OJ C 95, 23.4.2003.

(3)OJ C 204, 18.7.2000; OJ C 221, 7.8.2001; OJ C 260, 17.9.2001; OJ C 94, 18.4.2002; OJ C 221, 17.9.2002; OJ C 61, 14.3.2003; OJ C 95, 23.4.2003; OJ C 234, 30.9.2003; OJ C 32, 5.2.2004 ; OJ C 110, 30.4.2004; OJ C 302, 7.12.2004.

(4)  See point 3.3 below.

(5)OJ C 112 of 30.4.2004.

(6)  (The budget increase recommended in that opinion referred to the needs of the EU15 and thus needs to be extrapolated for the EU 25.) OJ C 260, 17.9.2001.

(7)  See point 1.2.

(8)  See also point 4.2 et seq.

(9)  See also point 4.6.

(10)  See also point 5.4 (OJ C 95, 3.4.2003).

(11)OJ C 110, 30.4.2004.

(12)  e.g. Canada, China, India, Japan, Korea, Russia and the USA.

(13)  This issue and some of the fundamental difficulties it throws up were also discussed in detail in section 7 (Research and technological innovation) of the EESC opinion on the European research area.

(14)OJ C 95, 23.4.2003; OJ C 110, 30.4.2004.

(15)  See also point 5.4 (OJ C 95, 23.4.2003).

(16)  See also recommendations in point 3.5.

(17)  The Communication recommends a stronger role for the Marie Curie Programme, which has made a particularly important contribution here.

(18)  The Committee reiterates its disappointment that its earlier recommendations to this effect were ignored.

(19)  Report of an expert panel chaired by Prof. Marimon, 21 June 2004, Sixth Framework Programme.

(20)  ‘The Community may set up joint undertakings or any other structure necessary for the efficient execution of Community research, technological development and demonstration programmes.’

(21)  See also point 4.7.2.

(22)  See, for example, points 7 and 8 (OJ C 204, 18.7.2000).

(23)  See http://sbir.us/pm.html and http://www.zyn.com/sbir/funding.htm.

(24)  Points 4.2.2, 4.2.3 and 4.2.4 (OJ C 95, 23.04.2003).

(25)OJ C 110 of 30.4.2004

(26)  The Committee has repeatedly recommended following a similar procedure in the Commission's activities to support research.

(27)OJ C 110, 30.4.2004 (CESE 305/2004) and CESE 1086/2004.

(28)  CESE 305/2004, point 5.18 (OJ C110, 30.4.2004).

(29)  See point 3.5.

(30)OJ C 112, 30.4.2004.

----