26. 6. 89 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 159/31 
Opinion on the proposal for a Council Decision adopting a specific research and technological 
development programme of the European Economic Community in the fields of raw materials 
and recycling (1990-1992) (!) 
(89/C 159/11) 
On 10 February 1989, the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, 
under Article 130q(2) of the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, on the 
abovementioned 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 7 April 1989. The rapporteur 
was Mr Jaschick. 
At its 265th plenary session (meeting of 26 April 1989) the Economic and Social Committee 
adopted the following Opinion unanimously. 
The Economic and Social Committee approves the 
abovementioned proposal, subject to certain reser­
vations. 
1. Introduction 
1.1. The proposed programme comes under research 
activity line 3—modernization of industrial sectors—of 
the framework programme for Community activities in 
the field of research and technological development 
(1987-1991) (2), and more specifically under heading 
3.3 'Raw materials and recycling', whose aim is to 
'contribute to the competitiveness of traditional and 
new industrial sectors of the Community, by satisfying 
their requirements in raw materials, both renewable 
(wood) and non-renewable'. 
1.2. This new programme extends some of the 
research activities undertaken as part of the programme 
on materials (raw materials and advanced materials) 
(1986-1989) (3). 
1.3. The proposed new research activities, which are 
to receive 45 million ECU as provided for under the 
framework programme, are broken down into four 
sub-programmes: 
— primary raw materials: 21 million ECU, 
— recycling of non-ferrous metals and strategic metals: 
6 million ECU, 
— renewable raw materials, forestry and wood prod­
ucts: 12 million ECU, 
— recycling of waste: 6 million ECU. 
1.4. These activities will be mainly carried out in the 
form of shared-cost contracts with part of the funding 
going to coordination activities, particularly for the 
recycling of waste. Funds will also be made available for 
training purposes (notably in the form of fellowships). 
(') OJ NoC52, 1. 3. 1989, p. 24. 
(-) OJ No L 302, 24. 10. 1987, p. 1. 
(') OJ No L 159, 14. 6. 1986, p. 36. 2. General comments 
2.1. Overall assessment of the programme 
2.1.1. The Committee generally approves the objec­
tives and content of the proposed programme, and 
notes that very extensive consultations were held with 
the relevant scientific and industrial circles when the 
programme was being drawn up. It also notes the 
favourable opinion of the Management and Coordi­
nation Advisory Committee (CGC) on raw materials 
and other materials. 
2.1.2. The Committee believes that the programme 
puts too much emphasis on primary raw materials at 
the expense of the other sub-programmes, particularly 
recycling. Greater importance should be attached to 
the recycling sub-programme in the interests of raw 
material supplies and for the sake of the environment. 
2.1.3. The Committee also regrets that when the new 
programme was being prepared, many of the projects 
being executed under the 1986-1989 programme had 
still not produced enough scientific findings for poten­
tial industrial applications to be assessed. The Com­
mission itself points out this shortcoming several times. 
2.1.4. Although the Committee has not had the 
chance to study in detail the interim report drawn 
up by a group of independent experts, it notes with 
satisfaction the fairly positive initial conclusions of the 
report regarding achievements so far in the field of 
primary and secondary raw materials. 
2.2. Priorities and criteria for the selection of research 
projects 
2.2.1. The Committee shares the CGC's view that 
the programme would seem to be rather ambitious 
given the funds allocated to it. Priorities will therefore 
have to be pinpointed and precise criteria for the selec­
tion of projects established if the programme is to 
have maximum economic impact, efforts are not to be 
No C 159/32 Official Journal of the European Communities 26. 6. 89 
dissipated by trying to tackle too many projects, and 
there is to be no overlapping with national or other 
Community programmes. 
2.2.2. Great care will also have to be taken to ensure 
that the projects selected are designed to satisfy the 
long-term needs of the Community as a whole. Accord­
ing to the experts' group, many of the projects in the 
past have been used to deal with problems of immediate 
economic importance which it would have been better 
to tackle in other ways. 
2.2.3. The Committee is pleased that research is to 
become increasingly trans-national in character. 
2.2.4. The Committee also fully supports the Com­
mission's desire to give preference, whenever there is a 
choice between projects of similar technological benefit 
and potential industrial impact, to those projects which 
involve small and medium-sized enterprises (SME). 
2.2.5. The Committee would also underline the need 
to pay special attention to the regional and social (par­
ticularly employment) impact of the projects and their 
contribution to the narrowing of the gaps between 
Member States' levels of development. Expansion of 
small-scale mining is likewise of great importance in 
this respect. 
2.2.6. The Committee would urge the Commission 
to take these comments fully into account when select­
ing research projects and setting priorities within the 
various sub-programmes. 
2.2.7. The Committee would impress upon the Com­
mission the need to consult the economic and social 
interest groups concerned, and not only the CGC. 
2.2.8. The Committee also proposes that the Com­
mission consider the possibility of using some of the 
available funds to promote pilot and demonstration 
projects to establish the technological and commercial 
feasibility of research projects whose results have 
proved to be promising. The Committee made the same 
proposal in its Opinion of 18 December 1985 on the 
1986-1989 programme(!). 
2.3. Coordination with related Commission proposals 
2.3.1. The activities proposed under the new pro­
gramme have links—and frequently very close links 
—with several other Community research pro-
(!) OJ No C 354, 31. 12. 1985, p. 8 (rapporteur: Mr de Nor-
mann). grammes, such as BRITE/EURAM, JOULE (non-
nuclear energies), STEP (environment) and research 
programmes in the fields of agriculture and biotechno­
logy. This implies the existence of appropriate pro­
cedures and arrangements to avoid duplication of work. 
The Committee supports here the recommendation 
made by the CGC. 
2.3.2. The Committee would also reiterate the urgent 
recommendation made in its Opinion on 18 December 
1985 to the effect that the Commission should 'ensure 
that the relationship between all relevant R&D pro­
grammes is reviewed at programme formulation, and 
thereafter on a routine and regular basis, to ensure that 
value for money is being obtained by the optimum use 
of available resources'. 
2.4. Coordination with related Member State pro­
grammes 
2.4.1. The Committee believes it is vital to ensure 
that Community funds do not go to research projects 
which could be carried out by individual Member States 
or by firms acting independently in their own interests. 
2.4.2. The Committee cannot therefore but be con­
cerned about the comments contained in the interim 
report of the experts' group to the effect that a large 
number of research projects in the field of primary and 
secondary materials could have been carried out under 
national programmes, even if, on the whole, the rel­
evance of the research activities to the requirements of 
industry and the needs of the Community is not in 
dispute. 
2.4.3. This situation confirms that the Committee 
was justified in making the point that a chapter in 
the communication should have been devoted to a 
description of the activities carried out by the Member 
States in the different areas in question, with details 
being given of both programme content and financial 
commitment. 
2.4.4. The Committee strongly endorses the follow­
ing recommendation of the independent experts' group: 
A prime aim of the Commission should be to produce 
a comprehensive directory which would detail all ongo­
ing research activities in the raw materials field taking 
place throughout the EC and in associated countries 
with whom links exist at present, or may be established 
in the future. This directory would need to be continu­
ously updated and would include all projects funded 
by the EC since the first raw materials programme 
(1978-1981), and all EC funded projects of subsequent 
and current programmes, and as complete information 
as can be obtained on all other relevant R&D work 
in the private, semi-private and public sectors. Con­
sideration should also be given to including facilities 
and equipment. The directory, which would form the 
26. 6. 89 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 159/33 
principal EC raw materials data base, should have a 
universal distribution, and should be accessible through 
one of the EC computer networks. 
2.4.5. This recommendation is valid for the whole 
of the new programme and could be applied with great 
profit to all Community research programmes. The 
Committee urges the Commission to act upon the rec­
ommendation, which would make it easier to set pri­
orities and select research projects. Extra staff might, 
however, be needed to implement this measure. 
2.5. Proposed funding of the different sub-pro­
grammes 
2.5.1. The Committee notes that about half of the 
proposed budget for the entire programme, including 
personnel, is to go to the primary raw materials sub-
programme alone. It likewise notes that most proposals 
for participation under the previous research pro­
gramme were also related to this sector. 
2.5.2. The Committee considers that the allocation 
of funds does not reflect the order of priorities and the 
relative importance of the various sub-programmes, 
given the acute environmental protection problems and 
the urgent need to find solutions to the problems. The 
Committee therefore calls for a reduction in the funding 
of the 'primary raw materials' sub-programme and 
transfer of the funds thereby released to the other three 
sub-programmes. 
2.5.3. The Committee also notes that, unlike the 
previous programme, the new Commission proposal 
does not allow any budget flexibility, i.e. it no longer 
permits the definitive funding of each of the sub-pro­
grammes to differ from the original appropriation. The 
Commission is urged to provide for such flexibility 
so that unforeseen developments in the course of the 
research can be taken into account in the allocation of 
funds. The CGC likewise recommends such flexibility. 
3. Specific comments 
3.1. Primary raw materials 
3.1.1. The Committee is not convinced that EC funds 
to 'enhance the competitive position of the Com­
munity's industries in world markets' are really necess­
ary for all the activities listed in Annex 1. The fact that 
potential beneficiaries have indicated their interest does 
not in itself in any way justify the Commission going 
beyond simple coordination. 3.1.2. It is important to take into consideration not 
only the structure and level of technological sophisti­
cation of Community firms in this sector, but also the 
contribution of the project in question to the develop­
ment of the mining potential of the Member States and 
more generally to the economic and social development 
of the most backward regions of the Community. 
3.1.3. The Committee attaches great importance to 
the development of new operating methods and special 
equipment for small-scale mining. 
3.1.4. The Committee also considers that priority 
should be given to research areas which are of particular 
importance from the point of view of improving work­
ing conditions and reducing the impact of mining oper­
ations on the environment. 
3.2. Recycling of non-ferrous and strategic metals 
3.2.1. The Committee endorses this sub-programme, 
regarding it as being consistent with Community objec­
tives in the field of environmental protection. 
3.3. Renewable raw materials: forestry and wood 
products 
3.3.1. The Committee unreservedly approves this 
sub-programme. It is pleased that the Commission 
attaches so much importance to the environmental 
aspects and so supports the Commission's efforts to 
offer the consumer high-quality products, whilst at 
the same time preserving natural resources and the 
environment. Nevertheless the programme should be 
focussed on securing an overall improvement in quali­
ty—not just the quality of wood as a raw material or 
other material but also the quality of the final product 
based on wood. 
3.4. Recycling of waste (REWARD) 
3.4.1. The Committee is convinced that this sub-
programme is worthwhile. However, the resulting ben­
efits to the environment should not be regarded simply 
as a by-product but should be made an integral part of 
the research projects. Furthermore, a waste-recycling 
research programme must not be allowed to detract 
from the need to use resources sensibly and responsibly 
since it is always better to prevent waste rather than 
have to treat it. However, this does not in any way mean 
that research and the development of new methods and 
technologies in this sector must not be encouraged. 
3.4.2. The Committee considers that whilst this sub-
programme is being executed, a major campaign should 
be launched to inform, and raise the awareness of, the 
public at large. 
No C 159/34 Official Journal of the European Communities 26. 6. 89 
3.4.3. The research activities to be carried out under 
this sub-programme are closely linked to the work 
under the heading 'Technologies for Environmental 
Protection' in the STEP(1) programme. The Com­
mission is urged to ensure that the activities under the 
two programmes are complementary so that maximum 
benefit can be obtained from the limited funds to be 
allocated to the REWARD sub-programme. 
3.4.4. This recommendation also holds good for the 
'Energy production from waste' programme, whose 
research activities are closely linked to the JOULE 
programme (non-nuclear energies) (2) and its sub-pro­
gramme 'Energy from biomass'. 
(') Science and Technology for Environmental Protection. 
(2) Joint Opportunities for Long Term Energy Supply. 
Done at Brussels, 26 April 1989. 
1. Introduction 
1.1. The Commission's proposal for a Council 
Decision to involve the EC in the funding and to assist 
in the development of high definition services in Europe 
has the full support of the Committee. 
1.2. The development of High Definition Television 
(HDTV) possesses a dramatic potential by providing in 
(') OJ No C37, 14. 2. 1989, p. 5. 3.5. Review and evaluation of the programme 
3.5.1. Article 4 of the draft Decision states that a 
review is to be carried out when the programme is in 
its second year. The outcome of the review will, if 
necessary, give rise to proposals to amend or extend 
the programme. 
3.5.2. When the Commission was drawing up its 
present proposal, sufficient scientific results of research 
under the current 1986-1989 programme were in many 
cases not yet available. The Committee therefore con­
siders that the final evaluation of the 1986-1989 pro­
gramme should be taken carefully into account when 
reviewing the new programme. 
3.5.3. The Committee would also reiterate its request 
that Article 4 be amended to make express provision 
for the Economic and Social Committee to be sent the 
findings of the review and of the evaluation of the 
results achieved. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Alberto MASPRONE 
the home and elsewhere a viewing experience similar 
to that of the wide screens of the cinema. It has been 
possible to achieve this by providing more detail in 
the picture which satisfies the technical relationship 
between visual acuity and viewing distance. 
1.3. HDTV contains a lot more detail which, com­
bined with a larger screen, allows a new viewing experi­
ence. Furthermore, the new technology can be used in 
new areas like printing, education, health, etc. Opinion on the proposal for a Council Decision on High Definition Television (!) 
(89/C 159/12) 
On 16 December 1988, the Council decided, in accordance with Article 198 of the Treaty 
establishing the European Economic Community, to consult the Economic and Social Com­
mittee on the abovementioned proposal. 
The Section for Industry, Commerce, Crafts and Services was instructed to prepare the work 
on this topic and adopted its Opinion on 5 April 1989, in the light of the report by Mr 
Poeton, rapporteur. 
The Economic and Social Committee, at its 265th plenary session, meeting on 26 April 1989, 
adopted the following Opinion with no dissenting votes and 3 abstentions.