28. 3. 88 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 80/7 
On 7 
Financial support for 'feasibility studies' should be on a 
small scale, or not provided at all. Financial support should 
primarily be given to hardware projects which will add to 
energy production in the next few years. 
On 9 and 10 
The creation of a data-bank would be particularly welcome 
if the data are structured with a view to application rather 
than stored for their own sake. 
Done at Brussels, 27 January 1988. 
1. The revision of the multiannual research programme 
for the European Community in the field of biotechnology 
can be supported as drafted. 
This endorses the Opinion of the Committee on the current 
Biotechnology Action Programme (BAP) (1985 to 1989) (2). 
2. Biotechnology is an important area of research not 
only for reasons of agricultural and industrial competi­
tiveness but also in the interests of all citizens, to protect 
health and to improve the quality of life. 
3. Biotechnology is a suitable area in which the 
Commission should supplement national programmes of 
research and development by a Community programme in 
which Community funds are used. Objectives should On 11 
It is very important for measures to be consistent, 
duplication avoided and information exchanged. In 
addition, a comprehensive marketing study should be 
carried out, to explore fully the procedures and instruments 
needed for the optimal utilization of renewable energy 
sources. 
The Committee regards it as necessary to implement the 
above suggestions in a purposeful manner. The Commis­
sion is asked to report within a reasonable time on the way 
in which they have been taken into account. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Commitee 
Alfons MARGOT 
include the promotion of effective interaction between the 
centres of industrial and technological research in the 
Member States in areas of cross-fertilization, dissemination 
of information, training, risk evaluation, and certain fields 
of research and development. 
4. It is to be noted that the Commission is not putting 
forward a programme of biotechnology work to be carried 
out at the JRC, nor does the Commission consider that the 
field is suitable for concerted action programmes. 
5. Finance Opinion on the proposal for a Council Decision adopting a revised multiannual research and 
training programme for the European Community in the field of biotechnology 
(1985 to 1989) (]) 
(88/C 80/04) 
On 13 November 1987, the Council of the European Communities decided to consult the Economic 
and Social Committee, under Article 130 Q of the Treaty establishing the European Economic 
Community, on the above-mentioned proposal. 
The Section for Energy, Nuclear Questions and Research, which was responsible for preparing the 
Committee's work on the subject, adopted its Opinion on 15 January 1988. The Rapporteur was 
Mr de Normann. 
At its 252nd Plenary Session (meeting of 27 January 1988) the Economic and Social Committee 
adopted the following Opinion with one abstention: 
(') OJ No C 15, 20. 1. 1988, p. 15. 
(2) OJ No C 25, 28. 1. 1985. 5.1. The Second Framework Programme for the period 
1988 to 1991 envisages an increase in the funds devoted to 
research, training and concertation in biotechnology. 
No C 80/8 Official Journal of the European Communities 28. 3. 88 
5.2. The Commission has re-examined the current 
Biotechnology Action Programme (BAP), ending on 31 
December 1989, and now recommends an increase in 
Community funding of 20 million ECU to be applied to a 
number of areas within the present range of activities. This 
expenditure will be complemented by a funding of a further 
15,5 million ECU from national budgets and other sectors 
at national level. Community funding will thus account for 
56 % of the total extra 35,5 million ECU proposed. 
5.3. When the Council agreed to the current pro­
gramme, the Community funding of 88,5 million ECU 
requested was reduced to 55 million ECU. In its Opinion at 
that time the Committee emphasised the importance of a 
worthwhile biotechnology programme and felt that the 
expenditure proposed was minimal. 
6. Future programme BRIDGE 
6.1. The Commission is preparing a new programme to 
be called Biotechnological Research for Innovation 
Development and Growth in Europe 1990 to 1994 
(BRIDGE) which will bring together basic science and 
industry. This will be submitted to Council at the end of 
1988. 
6.2. BRIDGE will replace the current BAP (which will 
end in 1989), and will begin in 1990. 
6.3. The current Framework Programme covers ex­
penditure on these programmes to the end of 1991. 
6.4. This Proposal provides 2 million ECU for studies 
and feasibility projects in support of BRIDGE. 
6.5. BRIDGE should preferably have been brought 
forward by one year to begin in 1989 and the current 
proposal replaced by one for a single year, to act as an 
introduction to BRIDGE. 
6.6. The Commission has, however, rejected this 
alternative for a number of reasons including the need to 
await the assessment of the current BAP and the urgency to 
involve Spain and Portugal in the current BAP. These 
reasons are valid. 
7. Involvement of industry 
7.1. An effective involvement with industry both in the 
research programmes and in the subsequent stages of 
development is a key factor in assessing the value which 
will accrue to the Community from this proposed 
expenditure. 
7.2. There was a difference of opinion on this in the 
CGC Biotechnology advisory committee. 7.3. Very adequate thought and effort have been applied 
to this problem by the Commission and this proposal is 
soundly based in this respect. 
7.4. The Commission approach appears to be in line 
with the principles for effective shared-cost research which 
the Committee enumerated in its Information Report and 
Opinion (') on 'EC Shared-Cost Research, Development 
and Demonstration Programmes' and in its Information 
Report 'The Importance of Technological Research and 
Development for Small and Medium Sized Enterprises'. 
7.5. In particular the majority of the shared-cost 
contracts involve transnational partnership and many of 
them involve a partnership with industry. 
7.6. The programmes selected demand an innovative 
approach which must be achieved by real cooperation and 
real common approach to research tasks at operational 
level. To achieve this the Commission is pioneering a new 
approach to cooperation in its European Laboratories 
Without Walls programme (ELWW). An ELWW project is 
described as an open-ended transnational association of 
cooperating European groups with a common commitment 
to target-oriented multidisciplinary research. The projects 
are designed to be complementary to national stimulation 
activities in the individual Member States. 
7.7. They involve 90 groups chosen from the most 
effective laboratories in the Community. 15 % of these 
groups involve industry directly as a fund-contributing 
partner. Other groups are associated with an expression of 
interest by industry in a successful outcome of the project. 
It could be said that this involves industry in a no-risk 
position which it is easy for them to accept. The fact that 
the Commission has made considerable advances in 
tackling this criticism is to be welcomed. 
7.8. The Commission has followed up each expression 
of industrial interest and offered the industry to co-finance 
the programme in a subsequent stage of development. 153 
companies have been contacted and over 50 % have 
expressed interest. Under legally-constituted contracts, 
industrial companies monitor the progress of programmes 
which interest them and then attend round table discus­
sions with the Commission to evaluate what they have 
learned. 
7.9. This is a new form of industrial liaison which is 
pioneering work for BRIDGE and is supported by 
industry's approval of the existing BAP programmes. 
7.10. The Commission feels that these procedures, 
which are industry-backed, will do more to encourage 
(') OJ No C207, 18.8. 1986. 
28. 3. 88 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 80/9 
industry to develop results of the programmes than the 
relatively small amounts of money they would be asked to 
contribute. They will also give a wider spread to 
dissemination throughout industry than would be achieved 
from a single industrial contribution per programme. 
7.11. The other aspect of the Commission's approach 
which the Section supports is a deliberate attempt to 
exploit the gaps and overlaps between technologies and 
their associated disciplines. 
8. The Green Platform — an approach to agro-industrial 
development 
8.1. The Commission has taken a further step in the 
promotion of industrial development of successful work in 
agricultural biotechnology. It has brought 32 agricultural 
firms together and acted as midwife to the Green Platform. 
8.2. In this scheme large technologically based com­
panies have associated with a number of agricultural 
producers such as seed companies and agro-food com­
panies to set up the Green Platform, with a Chairman and 
secretariat to pursue common objectives. It is to be noted 
that certain of the larger technological firms have not 
hitherto been persuaded of the value of involvement with 
Commission programmes. 
9. Utilization of research results 
9.1. The Committee has on earlier occasions urged that 
plans for utilization of successful research results are 
inserted as an integral part of each research programme ('). 
It has urged, further, that funding of appropriate 
development work be taken into account in the overall 
proposal for expenditure. 
9.2. The initiation by the Commission regarding the 
developments described above has gone some way to meet 
this requirement. 
10. Risk assessment 
10.1. The proposals on bio-safety with respect to 
agricultural uses of genetically-manipulated organisms 
involve 20 additional contracts (10 each for air-borne and 
soil micro-organisms). The programme which will then 
involve 60 scientists overall working in 2 groups of 15 
laboratories each probably constitutes the minimum 
'critical mass' which the Commission considers viable to 
establish a scientific basis for efficient regulation. This will 
(') OJ No C 23, 30. 1. 1984. involve 4,4 million ECU, 22 % of the total Community 
funding in this proposal. 
10.2. The Commission action to operate the Bio­
technology Regulation Interservice Committee (BRIC), 
involving DGs III, V, VI, XI and XII under the Chairman­
ship of a DG XI representative and a secretary from DG XII 
is to be applauded. The Commission is currently preparing 
directives to control by regulations and norms genetic 
manipulation and the deliberate release of transformed 
micro-organisms. 
10.3. The modest increase of 1,3 million ECU proposed 
mainly for a staff increase in concertation activities is in the 
right order of magnitude, all things considered. 
10.4. The Committee can support the work of the 
Concertation Unit for Biotechnology in Europe (CUBE) 
and welcome the fact that there will shortly emerge a 
proposal for European Cooperative Links between Agricul­
ture, Industry and Research (ECLAIR). This will cover 
development and demonstration work arising from the 
current BAP in the agro-industrial field. The Committee 
should be consulted on the matter in due course. 
10.5. The Commission should issue proposals for 
utilization in other areas of work as soon as possible either 
separately or incorporated in the BRIDGE programme. 
11. Bio-informatics 
The Committee supports the proposed expenditure of a 
further 4,3 million ECU in this area, described in the 
original programme as 'contextual measures'. This will 
double the volume of activity related directly to the 
application of information to applied biological research. 
This will bring the programme to what is now considered 
to be a 'critical mass' in size and, as a result 
— the programme will be complementary to the pro­
gramme for Advanced Informatics for Medicine (AIM), 
— the programme will meet the requirements for industry 
as submitted by CEFIC in their position paper 'Bio-
informatics in Europe'. 
12. Training activities 
One can also approve the proposal to increase training 
activities by 4 million ECU in response to heavy demands 
for access to training and for qualified trainees. This 
activity should be seen as creating seed corn leading to a 
very considerable increase in biotechnological innovation 
in the Community over the next few years. 
No C 80/10 Official Journal of the European Communities 28. 3. 88 
13. Participation of Spain and Portugal 
13.1. The present proposal requests 4 million ECU to 
extend the current programme to include Spain and 
Portugal, by the awarding of 30 to 40 contracts to cover all 
the activities of the current BAP. 
13.2. This is good as far as it goes but special attention 
should be given to contracts which knit these two Member 
States into existing contracts involving other Member 
States. In particular Portugal would benefit from specific 
proposals to improve its research and training facilities. 
14. Manpower 
14.1. The current BAP is operated by six 'A' grade staff. 
The CUBE unit employs three 'A' grade officials and one 
'B' grade. The current proposal calls for a further 2 'A' 
grade and 3 'C grade. 
14.2. A tight control of staff expenditure by the 
Commission can only serve to strengthen its efforts to 
provide value for money from its research. An under-
provision of staff should be avoided, if this results in 
insufficient time for consideration of programmes and their 
results, insufficient effort to devote to the encouragement 
and monitoring of contractors and no reserve in the case of 
illness or departure of staff. 
15. Impact assessments 
15.1. The fact that the proposal includes an assessment 
of impact on competitiveness and employment can only be 
welcomed, but it is to be regretted that in response to the 
Committee's Opinion on the original programme, no 
specific reference has been made to the need to give special 
attention to the involvement of SMEs in the programmes. 
As a corollary of this, there is a need to devise a mechanism 
to inform the European venture capital market about the 
prospects for biotechnology. 
15.2. The attention of both the Council and the 
Commission should also be drawn to the Committee's 
Done at Brussels, 27 January 1988. Opinion on the BRITE Programme (!) in which it 
emphasized that technological advance can only succeed in 
a generally acceptable social and economic climate. The 
Committee therefore urged for the introduction of a social 
impact assessment under a number of headings. Such an 
assessment should form an integral part of the BRIDGE 
programme to come. 
16. Communication to the public 
16.1. In its earlier Opinion the Committee urged the 
Council to ensure that the Commission provide an effective 
communication effort to inform the public at large on the 
issues involved without vulgarization by oversimplicity. 
16.2. Some concertation of the public reassurance 
programmes of individual Member States would be 
beneficial. 
17. International cooperation 
Attention would also be drawn to the Committee's 
previous Opinion (2) encouraging the Commission to 
pursue the possibility of extending the programme to 
European countries outside the Community. No reference 
to this is made in the current proposal. 
18. Ethical hazards of biotechnological research 
18.1. In its previous Opinion the Committee drew 
attention to the moral and ethical aspects of research in 
genetic engineering. 
18.2. It is now understood that the Commission looks to 
the Ethical Group of the Council of Europe to take the 
initiative in this aspect. 
(') O] No C 356, 31. 12. 1987, p. 5. 
(2) OJ No C 25, 28. 1. 1985. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Alfons MARGOT