No C 139/4 Official Journal of the European Communities 5. 6. 89 
Opinion on the proposal for a Council Decision adopting two specific research and technologi­
cal development programmes in the field of the environment: STEP: Science and Technology 
for Environmental Protection, and EPOCH: European Programme on Climatology and 
Natural Hazards (1989-1992) (*) 
(89/C 139/02) 
On 8 December 1988 the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, 
under Article 130 Q of the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, on the 
abovementioned proposal. 
The Section for Protection of the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Affairs, which 
was responsible for preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its Opinion on 
28 February 1989. The rapporteur was Mr Vercellino. 
At its 264th plenary session (meeting of 30 March 1989), the Economic and Social Committee 
adopted the following Opinion, by a unanimous vote. 
1. General comments 
1.1. The Committee congratulates the Commission 
on its move to step up joint research for the purpose 
of assessing, checking and averting environmental and 
climatic changes and hazards which have serious impli­
cations for socio-economic activity and the quality of 
life. 
This move is particularly valuable at a time when 
environmental changes and hazards are receiving close 
scrutiny from scientists, governments and the general 
public worldwide, and there are differing assessments 
as to the gravity and time-scale of the effects on human 
life and nature. 
Despite these differing calculations and forecasts, it 
is fair to assume that the effects could indeed prove 
intolerable in the not too distant future. 
The most authoritative forecasts predict that these 
changes will soon become irreversible (or reversible 
only at a very high price). The most pessimistic speak 
of ten years, while others mention a few decades. How­
ever, it is widely agreed that the timescale is tight 
enough to warrant urgent action. This difficult research 
area now requires an unprecedented level of commit­
ment, and more detailed assessments are needed in 
order to devise more effective, timely measures. 
1.1.1. After careful examination of the new STEP 
and EPOCH programmes, the Committee therefore 
approves the Commission proposals. These aim to pro­vide 'a scientific response of the European Community 
to the environmental challenge of the Nineties' and 
'scientific and technical support for the environmental 
policy of the EEC with an emphasis on developing 
preventative and anticipatory policies'. This will give a 
further boost to Community policy in this area, which 
has been revitalized by the inclusion in the Treaties of 
a separate chapter on the environment. The socio­
economic consequences of pollution have also increased 
the need to incorporate environmental considerations 
in the relevant Community policies. 
1.1.2. The Committee also endorses the three general 
aims shared by the programmes: 
1) to strengthen the scientific base of the action pro­
gramme for the environment; 
3) to improve Community research in this field, by 
improving coordination of national R&D pro­
grammes and measures; 
3) to help increase and consolidate the Community's 
economic and social cohesion. 
1.1.3. The Committee endorses the Commission's 
proposal to concentrate action on two closely linked, 
complementary programmes: EPOCH covering climate 
and natural hazards which threaten man and the 
environment; and STEP covering the effect which the 
manufacturing process has on man, human activity and 
the natural environment, and vice versa. 
1.1.4. Accordingly, the Committee urges the Com­
mission, the Council and the Member States to approve 
(i) oj No C 327, 20. 12. 1988, p. 10. and implement the two programmes as soon as possible, 
5. 6. 89 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 139/5 
allocating adequate resources and determining the 
necessary priorities for the main projects, areas and 
lines of research. 
1.2. Financing 
1.2.1. The programme as a whole is to receive 115 
million ECU over four years, to be divided up as fol­
lows: 
— 75 million ECU for STEP (including approximately 
6 million ECU for administration and coordi­
nation), 
— 40 million ECU for EPOCH (including approxi­
mately 4 million ECU for administration and coor­
dination). 
1.2.2. The STEP programme is subdivided into nine 
research areas and 28 projects, which in turn involve 
73 lines of research (an average of 0,94 million ECU in 
four years for each line of research, and 2,46 million 
ECU in four years for each of the 28 projects); while 
the EPOCH programme covers four research areas, 
subdivided into 21 projects (an average of 1,74 million 
ECU in four years for each project). 
1.2.3. The proposed allocations do not measure up 
to the programmes' general approach and aims, which 
also tie in with the Community's scientific contribution 
and commitment to various international programmes 
such as the International Geosphere Biosphere Pro­
gramme (IGBP) or Global Change programme. In its 
1986 Opinion on the 1986-1990 programme {l), the 
Committee deplored the meagre resources allocated 
(105 million ECU, 1986), despite the extremely favour­
able assessments of earlier work and the considerable 
demand for research. From industry there was a 
demand for research on major technological hazards 
and the environmental impact of production instal­
lations, while in society as a whole, the call was for 
research on the possible effects of climatic change and 
other natural phenomena. 
The demand for a better knowledge of these subjects 
—clearly pinpointed in 1986—has since increased. 
Despite this, overall fund allocations today are roughly 
the same as then. 
1.2.4. The distribution of funds between the two 
programmes seems weighted towards STEP (2,46 
million ECU per project as opposed to 1,74 million for 
EPOCH). This is because the range of problems to be 
tackled by the STEP projects (pollution and hazards in 
a wide variety of sectors) necessitated more research 
lines. On the other hand, EPOCH is to tackle complex 
and relatively new subjects in the field of climatic 
change and natural hazards; and, whilst the programme 
(!) OJ No C 101, 28. 4. 1986, p. 1. has already been strengthened, further subjects and 
lines of research will undoubtedly follow from it. In 
this connection, recourse should be made to the human 
sciences, especially to historical studies of climatic 
changes and their potential hazards. 
1.3. Content of the programmes 
1.3.1. The Committee recommends the establish­
ment of clear operational goals on which to focus 
resources and research. 
1.3.2. The Committee supports the proposed imple­
menting arrangements which provide for shared-cost 
research contracts, concerted action, coordination, 
training, studies and assessment. 
1.4. International cooperation 
1.4.1. The Committee favours the broadest possible 
international cooperation. It should involve non-EEC 
European countries, and produce synergies with other 
international research programmes presently under 
elaboration. 
1.4.2. Some projects—such as those covering long­
distance transport of pollutants, the study of migratory 
animals, or the climate in general—require extensive 
worldwide cooperation. 
1.5. Participation of industry 
1.5.1. European industry is aware of the environmen­
tal problems it could cause and must be involved in 
the proposed research programmes, particularly as its 
research centres have the means for effective cooper­
ation. 
1.5.2. Of course, industry is most interested in 
research areas with the most direct practical appli­
cations, such as major technological hazards and the 
environmental impact of installations. However, 
account must also be taken of (a) the close links between 
the proposed programmes, and (b) the importance of 
basic research, which is vital for the practical research 
carried out by industry. 
1.5.3. The Committee recommends simpler adminis­
trative procedures for the two programmes, in order 
to encourage industry to participate. This will help 
European industry become competitive in the outside 
No C 139/6 Official Journal of the European Communities 5. 6. 89 
world, where the call for the safeguarding of the 
environment is growing all the time. 
1.5.4. Large industries can help to meet small firms' 
research needs by engaging in technology transfer under 
the current projects and through other measures. 
1.6. Dissemination of research findings 
1.6.1. The Committee considers it of particular 
importance that every effort be made to ensure that the 
findings of the two programmes are put to good use by 
the authorities of the Member States, the business world 
and the communities concerned. 
1.6.2. To this end, a variety of channels must be 
devised for feeding the various target groups with infor­
mation. 
1.6.3. At present, information channels to the Mem­
ber States' authorities seem satisfactory. Public percep­
tion of research findings seems less satisfactory, accord­
ing to the Industrial R&D Advisory Committee's 
assessment of the earlier programme on the same sub­
jects. 
2. Specific comments 
2.1. STEP programme 
2.1.1. The 'Environment and human health' research 
area must have as its main aim the definition of the 
relationships between pollutant concentrations in the 
environment and the effect on human health. 
The study of early indicators and the development of 
new methods for conducting epidemiological analyses 
are of key importance, as they can help achieve the 
above-mentioned aim. 
2.1.2. In the research area 'assessment of risks asso­
ciated with chemicals', the project on quantitative 
structure/activity relationships (QSAR) seems formu­
lated in rather general terms: it is not clear whether 
these relationships already exist and must be applied 
so that they can be verified, or whether they still have 
to be established. At all events, the project as presented 
seems extremely broad. 
The Committee suggests that the aims be defined more 
clearly and precisely. 
2.1.3. The research area 'atmospheric processes and 
air quality' must be tied closely to the EPOCH pro­
gramme; it must also be integrated with action 611 
of COST and fit in with EUROTRAC (EUREKA). Administrative and organizational machinery must be 
provided for coordinating the various programmes as 
far as possible. 
The findings in this area could be used to assess the 
environmental impact of manufacturing or service 
plants, provided that some kind of index is applied. 
Proposals for this already exist, although their validity 
is still the subject of discussion. The Committee urges 
that attention and resources within this area be directed 
towards defining an air quality index or indices. 
2.1.4. The research area 'water quality', like that 
on air quality, must be linked to other international 
projects. However, as the approaches in these two areas 
differ, the need might appear less immediately obvious 
in the second case. 
The Committee urges that attention and resources be 
directed towards defining water quality indices (or an 
index) for the same reasons as given in point 2.1.3 
above. 
2.1.5. The research area 'soil and groundwater pro­
tection' must be linked to research programmes on the 
use of fertilizers and pesticides in agriculture, and with 
the erosion research unter the EPOCH programme. The 
Committee also urges that attention and resources be 
directed towards defining soil quality indices (or an 
index) for the same reasons as given in point 2.1.3 
above. 
2.1.6. The research area 'research into ecosystems' 
must fit in with on-going international projects such 
as COST 647 and EUROCARE (EUREKA). The aim 
should be to work on subjects of fundamental import­
ance for a responsible environment policy. However, 
the Committee notes that the aims of the 'terrestrial 
ecosystems' project are not clearly defined. The research 
areas are outlined in rather general terms. 
2.1.7. The research area 'protection and conser­
vation of the European cultural heritage' aims to protect 
all aspects of our cultural heritage, and hence includes 
physical expressions of our cultural history such as 
monuments. This subject is to be further developed, 
building on the valuable work of the previous pro­
gramme. 
2.1.8. The Committee recommends the pursuit of all 
possible forms of cooperation with industries in the 
Member States, for the sake of the joint development 
5. 6. 89 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 139/7 
of the 'technologies for environmental protection' pro­
jects. This will provide a direct check on the practica­
bility of the aims. 
2.1.9. The research area 'major technological haz­
ards and fire safety' also calls for extensive cooperation 
with industry, which can (a) provide information 
necessary to the development of the projects and (b) 
check the applicability of the findings. The Committee 
urges that use be made of the experience gained in this 
area by the Joint Research Centre (JRC) at Ispra. 
2.2. EPOCH programme 
2.2.1. The research area 'past climates and climate 
change' seems a particularly worthwhile way of assess­
ing the ability of models to follow changes in climate 
and the composition of the atmosphere in past cen­
turies. 
2.2.2. The research area 'climate processes and 
models' will have to be closely tied in with the 'atmos­
pheric processes and air quality' area of the STEP 
programme. The Committee considers that the content 
of the project is described clearly and comprehensively. 
It further considers that the findings can be of consider­
able use for assessing the environmental impact of 
manufacturing and service plants. 
2.2.3. The research area 'climatic impacts and clim­
ate-related hazards' is of major importance, not least 
for its potential contribution to the IGBP. Here too, 
the Committee would praise the formulation of the 
projects. 
2.2.4. The research area 'seismic hazard' appears to 
have been well prepared, and the projects focused on 
specific, realistic aims. The Committee urges that this 
area be coordinated with the United Nations' plans for 
the International Decade for the reduction of natural 
disasters. 
Done at Brussels, 30 March 1989. 3. Conclusions 
In approving the two research programmes, the Com­
mittee : 
— welcomes their careful and balanced drafting, cover­
ing all the main threats to the environment from 
manufacturing and service industries, 
— stresses the importance of ensuring that the two 
programmes do not simply consider the interests of 
the Member States, but also take in developments 
worldwide, 
— stresses the need for close coordination between 
the two programmes, and between them and other 
similar international programmes, 
— suggests the establishment of a joint coordination 
committee for the two programmes, which should 
also be responsible for relations with other non-
Commission programmes, 
— strongly urges that all necessary measures be taken, 
using a variety of information channels, to arouse 
the interest and ensure the extensive involvement of 
public authorities, industry, the social partners and 
the general public, both in the implementation of 
the research projects and in the proper use of their 
results, 
— regrets the modest nature of the funds made avail­
able, which are insufficient for the pursuit of all 
the general and specific objectives mentioned. The 
Committee urges that funding be increased in the 
next four-year programme, or preferably when the 
framework R&D programme is reviewed. In the 
meantime, the main priorities must be defined, and 
available funds must be concentrated on the objec­
tives which, in the course of the work, show the 
best prospects of further development and success. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Alberto MASPRONE