23. 7. 90 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 182/41 
Here the Committee notes that the Commission is currently 
planning specific action (though the details are not yet 
known). 
Pineapples, flower plants and cut flowers are other 
products requiring assistance, including arrangements for 
fast transport to markets all over Europe. 
3.6. In view of the importance of fisheries in all the most 
remote regions, this sector must not be overlooked. Here 
schemes should be tailored to the specific conditions. 
3.7. Transport is a crucial problem for these regions. 
Prompt action is needed to upgrade transport structures 
and infrastructure to meet the requirements of economic 
development and to improve links with the rest of Europe 
and domestic communications. Domestic transport is of 
vital importance, especially for the archipelagos. 
3.8. Special attention should be given to small, family-
run businesses, with particular emphasis on rural tourism 
and the hotel and catering sector. 3.9. Vocational training is a highly important activity 
which needs to be stepped up significantly (especially in 
connection with new technologies and language courses for 
hotel staff). 
It must be remembered that new technologies, besides 
boosting development in these regions, can have profitable 
spin-off effects for neighbouring developing countries. 
In addition, a greater command of languages is a key factor 
in cooperation with other countries and improving job 
opportunities in all sectors. 
3.10. All aspects of information and culture are also of 
key importance. These regions are far away from the centre 
of Europe and their popular traditions are a mix of 
European influence combined with powerful local in­
gredients. All measures, even if ostensibly purely economic, 
must therefore take account of a social and cultural 
substratum that differs widely from the rest of the 
Community. 
Production in these regions is primarily geared to domestic 
consumption. Provision should be made for measures 
securing supplies of the requisite resources and com­
modities at prices which enable the firms concerned to be 
competitive. 
Local crafts can play a major role in economic develop­
ment, e.g. in tapping and boosting local potential. Done at Brussels, 30 May 1990. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Alberto MASPRONE 
Opinion on the Research and Development Programme for Regions (STRIDE) 
(90/C 182/14) 
On 4 April 1990 the Commission decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, under 
Article 198 of the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community on the Research and 
Development Programme for Regions (STRIDE). 
The Section for Regional Development and Town and Country Planning, which was responsible 
for preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 22 May 1990. The 
rapporteur was Mr Christie. 
At its 277th plenary session (meeting of 30 May 1990) the Economic and Social Committee adopted 
the following opinion unanimously. 
No C 182/42 Official Journal of the European Communities 23. 7. 90 
1. Objectives of STRIDE 1.3.2. In Objective 1 and Objective 2 regions: 
1.1. The main aim of STRIDE is to strengthen the 
research, technological and innovatory (RTD) capacity of 
the regions whose development is lagging behind (Object­
ive 1) so that they are better placed to attract or retain 
technologically advanced activities in the productive 
sectors of the region and highly qualified personnel. Most 
of the financial resources of STRIDE will be allocated to 
Objective 1 regions. STRIDE can also assist regions 
seriously affected by industrial decline (Objective 2) by 
stimulating innovation in ways which encourage diversifi­
cation of the local economy. encourage cooperation between research centres and 
firms so that research carried out in the regions is more 
responsive to local needs, so that firms can meet a 
greater part of their requirements for assistance relating 
to the transfer and application of technology from local 
facilities and so that firms are stimulated to innovate 
and to employ highly qualified personnel. 
1.2. STRIDE is a Community initiative programme (like 
STAR, VALOREN, etc.), financed under the European 
Regional Development Fund's indicative allocation for 
these programmes, i.e. the 15 % not subject to the advance 
indicative allocation by country. 
1.2.1. STRIDE complements other Community actions 
in these regions through the Community Support Frame­
works (CSF's). It also completes other Community actions 
in the RTD field (the Community's RTD framework 
programme), in the field of technology transfer (SPRINT 
and BC-Net), of education and training (ERASMUS for 
mobility of students in higher education; COMETT for 
university-industry co-operation and EUROTECNET for 
innovation in vocational training linked to new tech­
nologies). 
1.2.2. STRIDE is designed to increase the contribution 
that such Community policies in favour of research, 
technology and innovation can make to achieving greater 
economic and social cohesion within the European 
Community. 2. Economic and Social Committee opinions on Com­
munity activities in the field of RTD 
2.1. The most recent opinion issued by the Economic 
and Social Committee on Community activities in the field 
of RTD is that of 15 November 1989 (OJ No C 56 of 
7 March 1990) on the framework programme for Com­
munity activities in the field of RTD (1990-1994) which 
reaffirms a number of comments made in previous 
Committee opinions. The most relevant observations on 
the role of RTD are restated in the present opinion as a 
basis for assessing how far the STRIDE programme goes in 
meeting the Committee's priorities. 
2.2. An issue of particular concern to the Committee has 
been a lack of emphasis on economic and social cohesion in 
Commission RTD proposals. The Committee is concerned 
that this could lead to a widening development gap within 
the Community. These development disparities could only 
be reduced by specific measures enabling economically 
disadvantaged Member States to develop their research 
capacity and narrow the gap with the level achieved by the 
more prosperous Member States. 
1.3. STRIDE concentrates on three categories of 
measure: 
1.3.1. In Objective 1 regions: 
STRIDE seeks to encourage a wider regional distri­
bution of research capabilities by helping public 
administrations to assess technology requirements, to 
audit local capabilities and to invest in the development 
of a long term capability in selected areas of RTD, 
improve the participation of research centres and firms 
in EC and other internationally funded research 
programmes. 2.3. The Committee has also emphasized the direct and 
effective contribution made to economic and social 
cohesion by training measures and the dissemination of 
research findings. There is a need to continue to devote 
particular attention to training activities to enable the less 
well-equipped Member States to participate fully in the 
research activities of programmes. 
2.4. The Committee has frequently stressed the import­
ance of RTD for small and medium-sized undertakings 
(SMEs) and the problems they face in terms of gaining 
access to technology. There is a need to promote greater 
SME participation in research programmes, so that a 
priority for the Community is to facilitate access by SMEs 
to the results of pre-competitive research in a form which 
can be utilized by them. The VALUE programme should be 
aimed primarily at SMEs. 
23. 7. 90 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 182/43 
2.5. On numerous occasions the Committee has analy­
zed two factors which seriously handicap the competi­
tiveness of EC industry: 
— slowness and inefficiency with which the results of RTD 
programmes are exploited commercially, 
— the inability to identify effectively the market or to 
develop new products or services sufficiently or rapidly 
enough to satisfy demand. 
2.6. The Committee has identified two further obstacles 
to innovation: 
— the absence of an easily obtainable Community patent 
and the paucity of Community standards, 
— a failure of financial institutions to give greater 
emphasis to providing investment funds to develop 
RTD entrepreneurial innovation. 
2.7. There is a need for full and effective mid-term 
reviews for the second and proposed third framework 
programmes to include an analysis of value for money 
spent, an estimate of likely achievements from promising 
programmes and a post-mortem on programmes stopped 
for lack of promise. 
2.8. The Commission should encourage new centres of 
skill to assist in training and regional collaboration. 
2.9. All programmes should be subject to evaluation 
which should be tailored to specific programmes: a simple 
and effective set of evaluation principles needs to be 
produced by the Commission. 
2.10. The Committee asks that the Commission back 
the framework programme proposals with a fresh look at 
the effects of intellectual property provisions on the 
effectiveness of RTD. 
3. STRIDE 
3.1. In light of the previous opinions of the Committee 
as summarized in paragraph 2 above, the Section wishes to 
give general approval to the proposal contained in the 
STRIDE programme. 
3.2. In particular, in view of the Committee's frequently 
expressed opinion that the Community's RTD policy 
should be seen as an integral part of the process of 
achieving economic and social cohesion, the objective of 
STRIDE of enhancing the RTD capability of the lagging 
regions is especially welcomed. 3.3. The Committee considers that the intention to limit 
the number of projects supported to a relatively small 
number in a small number of institutions is sensible, 
otherwise there is a risk of dissipating the limited resources 
and failing to create a medium term direction for regional 
RTD. 
3.4. The Committee welcomes the specific measures 
identified in Category A of STRIDE designed to generate 
better research capabilities in the Objective 1 regions. 
3.5. The Committee also welcomes the proposals under 
Category B designed to disseminate information among 
research centres and encourage technology transfer. It has 
further comments to make on the VALUE programme in 
paragraph 5 below. 
3.6. The Category C measures in STRIDE are designed 
to promote linkages between research centres and industry. 
The Committee welcomes these proposals and suggests 
that specific encouragement be given to the development of 
distance learning degrees by universities with particular 
emphasis on the management of innovation; and also to 
the development of teaching company programmes, again 
designed where possible for the management of innovation. 
3.7. The Committee notes that, in evaluating the quality 
of programmes to support, the Commission will take into 
account the presence of a coherent RTD strategy with a 
clear statement of the aims for regional technology 
development into which the aims of the operational 
programmes under STRIDE have been integrated. In 
making decisions as to which programmes to support, the 
Committee hopes that the Commission will bear in mind 
the Committee's previously expressed views on the 
importance of involving all groups in society in the process 
of identifying RTD priorities and of the effects on the 
quality of life. 
3.8. The Committee recognizes that rigorous scientific 
evaluation of STRIDE proposals is necessary but hopes 
that the wider social implications will also be borne fully in 
mind. 
4. Framework programme 1990-1994 
4.1. The Committee welcomes the comment of the 
Report of the Framework Programme Review Board 1987-
1991 that: 
'The issue of cohesion across Europe and the need to 
reduce existing gaps in science and technology is of 
paramount importance in a Framework Programme. 
No C 182/44 Official Journal of the European Communities 23. 7. 90 
The Programme must respond in a balanced way to the 
requirements and needs of all Member States, and not 
just the more advanced of them'. 
(Report of the Framework Programme Review Board, 
Brussels, June 1989, page 7). 
4.2. The Committee has already given its Opinion on 
the 1990-1994 framework programme and the main points 
have been summarized in paragraph 2 above. A total of 
ECU 5.7 billion has now been agreed for the period 1990-
1994 to which should be added a further ECU 3.1 billion 
from the current framework programme for 1990 and 
1991. 
4.3. The 1990-1994 framework programme has been 
regrouped under three main headings (enabling tech­
nologies, management of natural resources, management 
of intellectual resources) to cover six main activities 
(information and communications technologies; industrial 
and materials technologies; environment; life sciences and 
technologies; energy, human capital and mobility). This 
will be put into practice by means of 15 specific research 
programmes. The new framework programme incorpo­
rates a number of changes in the Community's research 
priorities and there have been significant increases in the 
resources available for research in the fields of the 
environment, biotechnology and the mobility of re­
searchers. 
4.4. The Committee recognizes that the new framework 
programme is intended to reinforce the synergy between 
programmes and expresses the hope that conscious efforts 
will be made to integrate research centres in the Objective 1 
and 2 regions into the priority areas of Community 
research. 
5. VALUE and SPRING programmes 
5.1. The Committee has previously recognized the 
importance of the VALUE programme in making a direct 
and effective contribution towards strengthening internal 
cohesion through support for the less-developed regions. 
5.2. The Council decision of 20 June 1989 (OJ No L 200 
of 13 July 1989, p. 23) adopted the VALUE programme on 
the grounds that it will contribute, inter alia, to enhancing 
the Community's economic and social cohesion and its 
harmonious development. The special needs of SMEs will 
be taken into account under VALUE as regards tech­
nological information and assistance for exploitation. 
5.3. The Committee welcomes the introduction of 
VALUE ad sees STRIDE as having a particularly important 
role to play in support of VALUE in disseminating 
technological information between research institutions, 
SMEs, etc. in Objective 1 and 2 regions. 5.4. The Committee also recognizes the important role 
to be played by SPRINT II, particularly in the areas of 
promoting industrial design and researching into the 
comparative costs of protecting intellectual property rights. 
The Committee welcomes the priorities of SPRINT II and 
expresses the hope that STRIDE, VALUE and SPRINT II 
will generate important synergies. 
6. Protection of innovation 
6.1. Notwithstanding its general support for STRIDE, 
the Committee is aware that EC regional policy has signally 
failed to reduce regional disparities within the Community. 
While the Committee has welcomed the recent doubling of 
the structural funds, and the new arrangements which 
accompany them, the effectiveness of the reforms is 
untested. The Committee is concerned that, although it 
regards STRIDE as a valuable additional Community 
programme, it may not be a sufficient condition to enable 
Objective 1 and 2 regions to overcome their technological 
disadvantages. 
6.2. An important aspect of the process of technological 
development not covered by STRIDE is the issue of 
intellectual property rights. This issue was raised by the 
Committee in its opinion on the 1990-1994 framework 
programme. The Committee returns to this issue on the 
grounds that if regional disparities are to be reduced, the 
desirability and feasibility of introducing differential 
intellectual property rights should be explored. 
6.3. A start to the development of new intellectual 
property rights was made in a report 'Direct Protection of 
Innovation', published for the Commission in 1987. This 
report called for the establishment of an Innovation Office 
to apply a new criterion of 'non-availability in the ordinary 
course of trade within the European Community' to 
incremental and other forms of innovation which firms in 
the Objective 1 and 2 regions are capable of generating. 
The report proposes that this new direct protection of 
innovation should be introduced initially so as to be 
available only to applicants located in an area which 
qualifies for specific regional aid. The argument in favour 
of differential intellectual property rights is that they would 
stimulate innovation and new organic growth in the 
peripheral areas of the Community. They would also be a 
strong inducement to firms in the 'Golden Triangle' to 
spread their production facilities for innovatory products 
more widely. 
6.4. The issue of intellectual property rights is one 
which the Committee considers should be considered 
23. 7. 90 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 182/45 
seriously as it is a means of addressing one of the main 
obstacles to innovation which the Committee has already 
identified, namely the absence of easily obtainable 
Community patents and the paucity of Community 
standards (paragraph 2.6 above). 
7. Venture capital 
7.1. The impetus to innovation in the peripheral regions 
afforded by direct protection of innovation will be 
enhanced by adequate provision of venture capital. In the 
United States, Japan and the core regions of the Com­
munity, venture capital has transformed the process of 
innovation. Venture capitalists provide the funds and assist 
in the formation of new high technology business. They 
cultivate networks of financial institutions, universities, 
large corporations and entrepreneurial companies, thus 
enabling them to reduce many of the risks associated with 
new enterprise formation and overcome many of the 
barriers that hold back innovation. Venture capitalists 
forge important linkages among a variety of organizations 
which are important to the innovation process and act as 
'technological gatekeepers' accelerating the process of 
technological change. 
7.2. The Committee has already identified this issue as a 
further obstacle to innovation (paragraph 2.6 above) where 
it comments on the failure of financial institutions to give 
greater emphasis to providing investment funds to develop 
RTD entrepreneurial innovation. In its Report on the 
Declining Industrial Areas (doc. CES 1347/89), the 
Committee also drew attention to the problem that 
centralization of capital markets has created by discourag­
ing the supply of venture capital to SMEs in Objective 2 
regions. The Committee recognizes that it is not part of the 
Commission's role to underwrite the risk associated with 
the commercial exploitation of new technology. 
7.3. Nevertheless, the Committee reiterates its concern 
over this issue and asks the Commission to consider 
exploring ways in which the supply of venture capital in the 
peripheral regions might be improved. In particular, the 
role of the European Venture Capital Association in 
promoting new technology in the peripheral regions should 
be re-examined. 
8. Monitoring procedures 
8.1. Notice C(89) ..., which lays down guidelines for 
STRIDE, indicates that during the implementation stages 
of programmes, monitoring will take place to ensure that the choice and progress of projects proceed in accordance 
with the dispositions agreed between the Commission and 
the Member State involved. 
8.2. Again this is an issue which the Committee has 
always considered important. The Committee has recom­
mended that all programmes should be evaluated but that 
evaluation should be tailored to specific programmes and 
has asked the Commission to produce a simple and 
effective set of evaluation principles (paragraph 2.9 above). 
In particular, the Committee is anxious to ensure that the 
optimum benefit of the framework programme for SMEs 
should be secured. 
8.3. The Committee is aware of problems which have 
arisen in the evaluation of framework programmes and 
these have been commented on in the Report of the 
Framework Programme Review Board (Brussels, June 
1989). 
8.4. The Committee has recognized a need for full and 
effective mid-term reviews of framework programmes 
(paragraph 2.7 above). The Committee is particularly 
concerned that this review process be applied to STRIDE. 
The Committee agrees with the Commission on the need 
for flexibility in the operation of STRIDE, that its 
operation should vary between Member States and that it 
should seek to fill gaps in the range of existing Community 
instruments. In this sense, STRIDE may be regarded as a 
'soft' programme and, as a consequence, it is correspond­
ingly more difficult to specify precise targets for STRIDE. 
8.5. The Committee welcomes the setting-up by the 
Commission of an evaluation unit for the monitoring of 
framework programmes. In addition, the Commission does 
possess a substantial body of information on the prevailing 
RTD capacity of the Objective 1 and 2 regions. 
8.6. Given that in its Report on Declining Industrial 
Areas (doc. CES 1347/89), the Committee has expressed 
the hope that there will be careful monitoring of the 
operation of the reformed structural funds in the Objective 
2 regions, the Committee hopes that specific reference to 
the operation of STRIDE will be incorporated as part of 
this monitoring process. 
Done at Brussels, 30 May 1990. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Alberto MASPRONE