No C 124/26 Official Journal of the European Communities 21. 5. 90 
2.16. The Committee notes the massive scale of 
rehabilitation at the Volklingen steel works in the Saar­
land involving the processing of 4,5 billion cubic metres 
of industrial waste containing more than 200 chemicals, 
some of which have penetrated to a depth of more than 
15 metres. The Committee recommends that an EC 
databank be set up to store information gleaned from 
redevelopment projects and the methods used. 
The Committee is impressed by the ambitious plant 
to preserve parts of the Volklingen steelworks as an 
important example of industrial archaeology. Parts are 
being preserved as a testimony to past steelmaking 
technology and other parts are being adapted for cul­
tural purposes. The Committee considers that it is desirable to preserve the collective memory because an 
economic activity is, in itself, also a social and societal 
phenomenon, the witness of an area in the evolution 
and development of activities. The Committee con­
siders that the possibility of establishing a foundation 
for this purpose should be investigated. 
2.17. From the observations in 2.14 and 2.15 above 
made to the Committee by the representatives of the 
development agencies in Charleroi and Saarland, it is 
obvious that there is a considerable degree of agreement 
between them on the strategy of regional development 
and the relationship between local agencies and the 
Community under the new funding arrangements. 
Done at Brussels, 28 March 1990. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Alberto MASPRONE 
Opinion on the proposal for a Council Decision adopting a specific research and technological 
development programme in the field of transport (EURET) (*) 
(90/C 124/10) 
On 12 December 1989, the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, 
under Article 100A of the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, on the 
abovementioned proposal. 
The Section for Transport and Communications, which was responsible for preparing the 
Committee's work on the subject, adopted its Opinion on 14 March 1990. The Rapporteur 
was Mr Moreland. 
At its 275th plenary session (meeting of 28 March 1990) the Economic and Social Committee 
adopted the following Opinion by a large majority (one abstention). 
1. Introduction: outline of Commission proposal 
1.1. This is a proposal for a Council Decision adopt­
ing a specific research and technological development 
programme in the field of transport (EURET). 
1.2. The funding for this programme (25 million 
ECU) will be taken from point 2.3 of the current frame-
(M OJ No C 318, 20. 12. 1989, p. 5. work programme for Community activities in the field 
of research and technological development (1987-1991). 
However the funds will be expended over a period from 
1990 to 1993. Generally the Community participation 
will be 50 % of total expenditive on a project although 
exceptionally universities and research institutes may 
be eligible for 100%. 
1.3. The Commission states that the criteria for the 
choice of research topics are: 
215.^ COfficialjournal of the European Communities moCLm^ 
— priority or exploratory research areas^ 
— lack of legislative or commercial incentives for such 
research^ 
— ma^or resources required for research and develop 
ment^ocfo^ 
— long term research involved^ 
— projects are in the public interests 
— projects contribute towards standardisations 
— results can usefully be disseminated through Com 
munity channels. 
1mA Asaresult of its application of the above criteria 
the Commission hasproposedelevenresearchtopics^ 
grouped into three subprogrammes^ 
1) C^^^^^^^r^or^^^o^^o^ 
— cost^benefit and multicntena analysis for new road 
constructions 
— European rail traffic management conceptions 
— design and assessmentof a vessel traffic manage 
ment systems 
— trials in automated airBground data exchangefor 
air traffic management systems in Europe^ 
— study on the controller working position in air 
traffic management systems in Europe. 
— economic scenario and demand projections for 
freight transport of the Community^ 
— economic and technical research of the transfer of 
goods^ design and evaluation of rapid transfers 
— optimisation of manpower in maritime transports 
— taking human factors into consideration in manB 
ship system. 
— improved methods for evaluating the road safety of 
car and trailer trains^ 
— assessment of thednvingsafety of possible truck 
and trailer combinations. 
2. C^ieral comments 
2.L I^he Committee would welcomeaproposal for 
a comprehensive transport research programme and^ 
indeed^ believes that suchaprogramme is overdue. 2.2. The Committee does not believed however that 
this proposal satisfies this requirement. 
2^. The Committee is concerned that the sum 
involved (25 million ECU) is clearly minute in terms of 
overall transport expenditure and investment and small 
even in relation to current transport research expends 
ture by both public and private research organisations 
ata^iember^tatelevel.lndeed it seems strange that 
the funding for a comprehensive transport research 
programmeislessthanfor aspecifictransportbased 
research programme such as L^RrVE.Eurther the devel 
opment of this funding appears to be almost asaresidue 
from the current framework programme (and^ indeed^ 
no further funding is envisaged in the new framework 
programme) rather than asaresultofaclearly defined^ 
cohesive and strategic programme for transport 
research. Consequently the Committee believes the pro^ 
gramme will be very limited in its effectiveness and is 
no substitute for a well thought out and developed 
Community transport research programme. 
2mA The Committee questionsthe extent to which 
the proposed programme has taken into account 
a) the future demand for transport and the consequent 
tial priorities for research^ 
b) the avoidance of duplication by the member states 
in the field of transport research^ 
c) the need to steer transport demand towards modes 
which are safer^use less energy and are less environs 
mentally hostile^ 
d) the resulting need to bring the quantity and quality 
of transport services into line. 
The Committee considers that broader consultation 
prior to theproduction of the proposal should have 
been undertaken and should continue during any sub 
sequent research. 
2.5. The Committee notes that the Commission 
states that 'the research topics included in EURFT 
comply with'the criteria outlined in L^.^et it questions 
the extent to which the topics meet fully the Com 
mission'sowncntenain addition the outline in Annex 
lof objectives doesnotappeartobeconsistent with 
the priority themes in Annex ILEorexampleghe section 
on'logistics.nAnnexlmakes no mention of shipping 
and yet twoothe four topics in the priority themes in 
Annex 11 concern maritime transports and while in 
No C 124/28 Official Journal of the European Communities 21. 5. 90 
Annex I air, sea, rail and road accidents are discussed, 
the topic of 'reduction of harmful externalities' in 
Annex II only concerns road accidents. 
2.6. In the context first of points 2.3 and 2.4 above, 
but most importantly in the light of the limited funding 
for the programme, the Committee suggests that the 
Commission would be advised to limit the number of 
topics for research to, say, 4 or 5 at this stage. 
2.7. The Committee has noted in the recent progress 
report on the DRIVE programme that recommen­
dations in the management of the programme should 
also be taken into account in the management of 
EURET. 
3. Specific comments 
3.1. Preamble 8 
This preamble should make it clear that it covers Euro­
pean-wide organizations (such as the 'Union 
Internationale des Chemins de Fer') which would be 
suitable to undertake research. 
Add: 'or organizations which represent these transport 
interests in all or a number of Member States'. 
3.2. Article 1 
The date of 1 March should be altered consequent to 
the date the Council takes its decision on this proposal. 
33. Article 2(1) 
The Committee repeats its concern (detailed in 2.2) 
about the overall funding of the programme. 
3.4. Article 4 
The Committee regrets that the Commission does not 
include it in the recipience of the report on the pro­
gramme particularly given the obligation to consult the 
Committee under Article 130Q 2. In this context it 
points out that, if the reports include proposals for 
modification or prolongation, the legal requirement to 
consult the Committee should be fulfilled and that the 
Committee would require any evaluation of the results 
to assist it in giving its opinion. 3.5. Article 10 
The Committee welcomes the possibility of extending 
the programme to non-member countries and believes 
the Commission should be empowered to start nego­
tiations. But it would add: 
a) third countries should normally bear fully the 
additional cost involved; 
b) so far extension of research projects has basically 
been to States of the European Free Trade Associ­
ation (EFTA). The Committee believes that, as a 
generalization, all countries that wish to join in are 
welcome, but in the light of the transit issues priority 
should be given to Austria, Switzerland and Yugos­
lavia. Also in view of current events, consideration 
should now be given to include Eastern European 
countries. 
3.6. Annex 1 and Annex 11 
The Committee repeats its concerns already expressed 
in the General Comments (particularly 2.3.2.4 and 2.5) 
and in particular the proposal to concentrate on a more 
limited number of topics (2.5). With this in mind the 
Committee recommends that the Annexes I and II be 
rewritten in order to: 
a) show more clearly the match between the objectives 
and any proposed research topics; 
b) state explicitly what should be achieved in each 
topic, giving an estimate of the cost/benefit; 
c) give an indication of the likely funding for each 
topic area. 
3.7. Comments on present Annex 11 
In considering which topics should be maintained the 
Council and Commission should take account of the 
following comments. 
(The comments below refer both to the heading in 
Annex II and to the detailed explanation in Committee 
2 of the programme description.) 
Optimum network exploitation 
3.7.1. Cost-benefit and multi-criteria analysis for new 
road construction (cost 1 million ECU) (*) 
The Committee notes that 'the aim is to establish a 
Europe-wide system of reference for analyses of road 
construction projects'. 
(l) These figures are the indicated budget for each project which 
have been suggested by the Commission but which are not 
included in its formal proposal. 
21. 5. 90 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 124/29 
It suggests that—particularly in the light of Community 
interests—this study should be devoted to identifying 
differences in evaluating cost-benefit and multi-criteria 
analysis for transport infrastructure generally—with a 
view to proposing a standard Community methods 
of analysis. In this context rather than give 'special 
attention' to urban road-building, cross-frontier infra­
structure should be the focus. 
3.7.2. European rail traffic management conception 
(cost 5 million ECU) 
European rail traffic management embraces adminis­
trative and commercial aspects as much as technological 
yet the detail on the subject seems only to address 
the technological issues. So the programme should be 
renamed a 'common European rail traffic control 
system'. 
3.7.3. Design and assessment of a vessel traffic man­
agement system (cost 3 million ECU) 
This topic appears to cover similar ground to the COST 
301 project carried out some years ago. The outcome 
of that project was most disappointing and should not 
be taken as the basis for future research. 
3.7.4. Trials in automated air/ground data exchange 
for traffic management systems in Europe and 
'Studies on the controller working position in 
air traffic management systems in Europe' (cost 
5 million ECU and 3 million ECU) 
The programmes are surely interrelated and given obvi­
ous synergies the programmes could be considered as 
one. 
However, it appears that there is an understanding that 
5 million ECU is to be a grant to Eurocontrol for the 
air traffic management research programme PHARE. 
While the Committee gives its strong support to this 
programme it wonders if EURET is the proper vehicle 
for a grant and also if in effect it duplicates what the 
Member States intend, in any event, to give to PHARE. 
Logistics 
3.7.5. Economic scenario and demand projections for 
freight transport in the Community (cost 1 milli­
on ECU) 
This is an area of considerable importance but this is 
not clear from the title which should reflect the potential 
importance of combined transport and intermodal development. The Committee suggests 'Defining future 
freight needs in the Community with special reference 
to intermodal links'. 
3.7.6. Economic and technical research into the tran­
shipment of goods. Design and evaluation of 
rapid transfer systems (2 million ECU) 
It is not clear how this satisfies all the criteria adopted 
by the Commission (as outlined in 1.3). 
In fact there are likely to be commercial incentives for 
the development of rapid transfer systems. This appears 
to be a topic more appropriate to BRITE. 
3.7.7. Optimization of manpower in maritime trans­
port (3 million ECU) 
Research in this area was suggested in the Commission's 
recent proposals for a maritime transport programme 
and should be viewed in the light of the Committee's 
Opinion on that subject (CES 1257/89) (1). 
3.7.8. Taking human factors into consideration in 
man/ship systems (0,5 million ECU) 
This needs clarification, but, in any event, should take 
full account of parallel work undertaken by other inter­
national or national bodies. 
3.7.9. Reduction of harmful externalities (0,5 million 
and 1 million ECU) 
The Committee welcomes road safety as an area for 
Community research. But the topics included are not 
the most central and significant areas of road safety. In 
any event the first step must be a proper examination of 
the incompatibility of Member State safety and accident 
data together with the systematic analysis of definitions 
in this field. 
3.8. Annex III 
Implementation 
The Committee has noted that preamble 7 of the draft 
Decision stresses the importance of involving small 
and medium-sized enterprises (SME) and that in its 
0) OJ No C 56, 7. 3. 1990. 
No C 124/30 Official Journal of the European Communities 21. 5. 90 
'Assessment on impact on small business' the Com­
mission states that: 
'small entreprises may find it difficult: 
— to finance the portion of the shared-cost research 
not financed by the Community: this is generally 
at least 50% of the total cost.' 
Yet SME unlike universities and research institutes 
which can qualify to claim up to 100 %, only can claim 
up to 50%. 
3.9. Financial Statements 
3.9.1. The Committee thinks that a sum of 2,6 
Done at Brussels, 28 March 1990. million ECU for staff and administration out of a total 
budget of 25 million is excessive. 
3.9.2. The Committee believes that the commitment 
schedule should be three years and not four to coincide 
with the revision of the third framework programme 
(1990-1994). 
4. Conclusion 
The Committee is opposed to the general approach and 
imbalance of the EURET programme, which suffers in 
particular from the fact that resources do not match 
needs. 
The Committee would urge the Commission to ensure 
that the justified criticism contained in the Opinion 
helps to improve the present document and avoid so 
many imperfections in the future. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Alberto MASPRONE