No C 332/40 Official Journal of the European Communities 31. 12. 90 
Opinion on the proposal for a Council Decision on a specific research and technological 
development (R&TD) programme in the field of life sciences and technologies for developing 
countries (1990-1994) 
(90/C 332/11) 
On 6 June 1990, in accordance with Article 130Q(2) of the Treaty establishing the European 
Economic Community, the Council of te European Communities decided to consult the 
Economic and Social Committee on the abovementioned proposal. 
The Section for Energy, Nuclear Questions and Research, which had been instructed to 
prepare the Committee's work on the matter, drafted an Opinion on 6 Sepember 1990 
(Rapporteur: Mr de Normann). 
The Economic and Social Committee unanimously adopted the following Opinion at its 
279th plenary session (meeting of 19 September 1990). 
1. General 
1.1. The Committee endorses this proposal for a 
Council Decision on a specific research and technologi­
cal development (R&TD) programme for 111 million 
ECU in the field of life sciences and technologies (STD) 
programme for developing countries over the period 
1990 to 1994. 
1.2. This proposal (STD3) is the logical successor to 
the two previous programmes. STD1 for 40 million 
ECU 1983-1986 was experimental (*). STD2 for 80 milli­
on ECU 1987-1991, is now consolidating the experience 
gained in the earlier programme (2). 
1.3. In its Opinion on STD2 (3) the Committee made 
a number of specific comments. The Committee notes 
that some of these were acted upon in formulating 
this proposal. Others which are still relevant to this 
proposal are emphasized below. 
2. Background 
2.1. The Council Decision 90/221/Euratom, EEC of 
23 April 1990 adopted a third framework programme 
for Community activities in the field of R&TD (1990-
1994) (4). 
2.2. Annex IID STD provided for a programme with 
specific objectives: 
— to increase cooperation in the fields of tropical 
agriculture (including fisheries) medicine, health 
and nutrition between European scientists and 
scientists from developing countries, 
(!) OJ No L 352, 14. 12. 1982, p. 24. 
(2) OJ No L 355, 17. 12. 1987, p. 41. 
(3) OJ No C 150, 9. 6. 1987, p. 13. 
(4) OJ No L 117, 8. 5. 1990, p. 28. — to enable the developing countries to benefit from 
the scientific knowledge and technological develop­
ments available in the Community, 
— to encourage the development of their own research 
capacity, 
— to encourage the Member States of the Community 
to increase their own capacities. 
3. The programme proposal (STD3) 
3.1. Overall assessment 
3.1.1. The Committee notes that the Commission 
proposes to meet the above objectives by selecting, 
partially funding and managing a number of R&TD 
projects within the scope defined in the framework 
programme. This STD programme is designed to follow 
the lines of the two earlier programmes and to benefit 
from experience gained with them. It will also provide 
continuity in certain important areas of work. 
3.1.2. The Committee accepts that this is one 
approach to achieve the objectives. Specific projects 
are chosen which involve shared-cost R&TD work in 
specific technological areas for the potential benefit 
of certain institutions and their technologists in the 
countries involved. 
3.1.3. This approach, if it is to be effective, needs to 
be concentrated into a few projects which exceed the 
critical mass necessary for success. In its Opinion on 
the second STD programme the Committee stated: 
'The scope of the project lists... is extensive and it 
is questionable whether action on all of these sub­
jects can be contemplated in a programme of this 
size... There is... a danger that the available funds 
31. 12. 90 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 332/41 
will be spread too thinly on too many projects in 
an endeavour to satisfy everybody. At the same time 
with such large project lists the time taken to assess 
and decide upon the multitude of projects proposed 
is itself a major administrative burden.' 
Again: 
'The Committee would see benefit in supporting 
fewer projects in a more positive way. This would 
also have the advantage of enabling the Commission 
to assess the projects more thoroughly.' 
3.1.4. The Committee realises, however, that there 
are inherent disadvantages in this approach: 
— funds are unlikely ever to be sufficient to provide 
an adequate number of projects of the requisite size, 
— increased funding would require an increase of tech­
nological manpower to operate the projects together 
with the provision of the necessary infrastructure in 
the developing countries, 
— the precompetitive stage of the projects does not 
attract industry either in the Community or in the 
developing countries, 
— technologists in the developing countries, having 
benefitted from the training while working on the 
project, move to another country where their ser­
vices are better rewarded, 
— the Commission will always be subject to political 
pressure to spread their limited resources over a 
wider area, 
— these projects will tend to be somewhat isolated and 
compartmentalized in the Community approach to 
the developing countries. They will lack the social 
and economic research which should form an inte­
gral part of the overall approach if the objectives 
are to be met, the projects adequately defined and 
the results of the R&TD are to be put to widespread 
and effective use. 
3.1.5. The Committee felt that it was required to 
consider whether the programme proposed was the 
most effective way to meet the objectives proposed in 
the framework programme. In the light of its Opinion 
on the 1990-1994 framework programme (*) it analysed 
the necessary components of a policy for science and 
technology for developing countries and derived the 
major objectives of such a policy. These are set out 
under section 4. 
3.1.6. The Committee urges the Commission to pro­
pose and the Council to consider an overall Community science and technology policy and consequential 
strategy for the developing countries which includes a 
R&TD component. 
3.1.6.1. This overall strategy would seek to link sci­
ence and technology to economic development. It 
would seek the participation of industry and the train­
ing of management. It would make use of economic 
and social research to enhance the effectiveness not only 
of the choice of projects but also of their subsequent 
utilization and dissemination. It would encourage the 
development of links between institutions in the Com­
munity and institutions in developing countries. 
3.1.6.2. Above all, it should attempt to bring together 
the various instruments available to the Commission in 
a common purpose and with synergistic effect. In this 
connection the Committee draws attention to its Opin­
ion on EC economic and trade cooperation with Latin 
America (2) in which it encourages the creation of insti­
tutional and training links. Such considerations apply 
equally to other developing countries. 
3.2. Research project groupings 
3.2.1. The Committee realises that the achievement 
of objectives will depend to a considerable extent on 
the composition of the research project groupings. 
3.2.2. To further the objectives, the Commission is 
developing the concept of multipartnership by basing 
projects on three or more laboratories, two of which 
are in Member States and one in a developing country. 
In STD2, 75% of projects involved more than three 
laboratories and 25 % more than five. 
3.2.3. These multipartnerships should be designed to 
encourage links between institutions in the North and 
South of the Community. 
3.2.4. Technology links and institutional strengthen­
ing between academic institutions and research and 
development (R&D) institutes should form a part of 
every project. It should also include training activities. 
3.2.5. The Commission should pursue every possi­
bility of reducing the load on their own supervisory 
staff. The Committee understands that it already 
appoints a project leader in each multipartner project. 
It might be able to go further with the concept of a 
managing institution for a group of projects in a given 
area of technology or in a specific geographical area. 
(!) OJ No C 56, 7. 3. 1990, p. 34. (2) OJ No C 75, 26. 3. 1990, p. 13. 
No C 332/42 Official Journal of the European Communities 31. 12. 90 
3.3. The call for project proposals 
3.3.1. The Committee recommends reinforcement of 
Commission efforts to seek project proposals. It first 
raised this matter in the information report drawn 
up by the Section for Energy, Nuclear Questions and 
Research on 'EC shared-cost research, development and 
demonstration programmes' of 6 September 1985 (1). 
There are still reports of important research institutes 
which do not learn early enough of the call for projects 
to be able to assemble proposals. 
3.3.2. The Committee feels that current Commission 
arrangements involving the Official Journal are inad­
equate and should be improved. The Commission needs 
to assemble a list of all potential project contributors 
and take steps to contact them directly and in good 
time. 
3.3.3. The Committee is of the view that the Com­
mission should consider simplifying the submission pro­
cedure for projects, at least in their first stage, to avoid 
unnecessary effort from unsuccessful contenders. 
3.3.4. In this programme additional consideration 
must be given to the input of project ideas from the 
developing countries. 
3.4. Industry involvement 
3.4.1. The Committee would like to see the Com­
mission provide for more involvement by all levels of 
industry both in the Community and in developing 
countries. 
3.4.2. Industry can contribute to these projects in 
many ways: 
— major technological companies can contribute tech­
nology tot the research work, 
— parts of the projects can be subcontracted tot tech­
nological small and medium-sized enterprises 
(SME), frequently located in science parks under 
the wing of academic institutions, 
— research institutes rely on an industrial support 
for their research funds. Their projects must be 
attractive to their backers if such institutes are to 
participate in projects. 
3.4.3. The Commission should seek ways and means 
of attracting the interest and active participation of 
industry (at all levels of economic operation) in these 
projects. Commission experience to date has been that 
industry shows no great desire to be involved since the 
projects are precompetitive. 
(!) CES 423/84 fin. 3.4.4. The Committee suggests that the Commission 
should involve industrial representatives in discussion 
of the various possibilities. The successful outcome of 
projects will inevitably lead to industrial opportunity 
at various levels and that opportunity will be greater 
for the industrial operators that are aware of or have 
contributed to the projects. 
3.5. General aspects of projects selection 
3.5.1. The Committee emphasizes that certain 
aspects of the programme should be given particular 
attention when individual projects are selected: 
— A considerable proportion of the funds available 
should be devoted to low and intermediate tech­
nology systems which are practical, easy to install 
and to sustain with the overall aim of reducing the 
food deficit. 
— All projects must be evaluated within the general 
economic and social performance of the developing 
countries affected. 
— Projects must take into account environmental and 
other intersectoral aspects such as health, irrigation, 
etc. 
— Ease of subsequent applicaton of the results, the 
training necessary to apply them and the general 
ability to sustain the results are important in decid­
ing between competing proposals. 
— Industrial organizations will be vital in developing 
successful work on the ground by means of their 
marketing forces, providing that work involves the 
support of their products ans services, existing or 
to be developed. Opportunities for SME in the 
developing countries will be created. Deliberate 
efforts should be made to keep industry informed 
of the opportunities. 
3.6. Agricultural, medicinal, health and nutritional 
projects 
3.6.1. The Committee is not in a position to com­
ment on the very wide range of scientific and technical 
objectives given in Annex I of the Commission pro­
posal. 
3.6.2. It urges, however, that the Commission insti­
tutes a check list system whereby all technical proposals 
are evaluated with respect to the general criteria in 
paragraph 7 above. 
3.6.3. In particular, it emphasizes that high economic 
value crop work needs careful attention especially from 
the quality aspect. Post harvest, losses and the mainten­
ance of quality in the harvested product are important. 
31. 12. 90 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 332/43 
3.6.4. The Committee considers that the Com­
mission should give significant attention to projects 
which will encourage sustainable farming systems. 
3.6.5. In health aspects the Committee recognized 
that the current STD2 programme has concentrated on 
the means to tackle problems rather than diseases. 
However, disease is on the increase and the Committee 
supports a proposed change of emphasis in project 
selection: 
— controls affective against the principle ills, malaria, 
schistosomiasis, with associated intersectoral prob­
lems such as irrigation and the environmental 
aspects, 
— reinforcement of systems for health care, 
— improvement of the nutrition of the least favoured 
with its intersectoral aspects of agriculture. 
3.7. Intersectoral projects 
3.7.1. The Committee emphasizes that many of the 
projects selected should and will incorporate more than 
one specific aspect of the programme. Some will involve 
in one project aspects of agriculture medicine and 
health. 
3.7.2. Such intersectoral projects are relatively are. 
They can only be successful if the technology is kept 
as simple as possible so that the teams may include a 
number of multidiscipline scientists. Such scientists are 
needed in developing countries and it is hoped that the 
training resulting as a spin-off from this programme 
will encourage others. 
3.8. Environmental matters 
3.8.1. The Committee understands that no environ­
mental projects per se are to be included. Instead 
environmental aspects are to be taken into account in 
individual projects. 
3.8.2. Nevertheless the Committee urges the Com­
mission to take note, not only of the conclusions of the 
environmental council on 19 September 1989 referring 
to the conservation of tropical forests, but also to take 
account of other habitats. 
3.8.3. They should develop mechanisms of cooper­
ation with the Food and Agriculture Organization of 
the United Nations (FAO) and other relevant organiz­
ations with a view to using projects within STD3 which 
will be sustainable with the need to conserve and renew 
tropical forests. 
3.9. Concertation within the Commission 
3.9.1. In accordance with paragraph 3.1.5. above and 
with section 4 below, the Committee recommends that the Commission sets up a concertation unit to bring 
together and disseminate knowledge of all the available 
means and resources from which technological assist­
ance and training may be provided for the developing 
countries. This concertation unit should involve all 
relevant Directorates General. 
3.10. Communication to the ESC of the progress 
report and evaluation raport 
3.10.1. Article 5.1 requires a review of the pro­
gramme in 1992 tot be sent to the Council and the 
European Parliament accompanied where necessary by 
proposals for the amendment of the programme. The 
Committee considers that since this proposal calls for 
its Opinion it is illogical and unconstitutional for it not 
be consulted on amendments. The Committee asks the 
Commission to revise Article 5.1 accordingly, and to 
ensure that it is drafted in accordance with Article 130Q 
of the Treaty. 
3.10.2. Similary (Article 5.2) the Committee wishes 
to receive the evaluation of the results achieved. 
3.10.3. Article 5.3 requires these reports shall be 
made with regard to the objectives set out in Annex I 
of the proposed Decision. The Committee asks the 
Council to make clear that these reports should be 
made with regard also to the objectives given in 4D of 
Annex III of the framework programme Decision. 
4. Policy for science and technology for developing 
countries 
4.1. The relevance of the R&TD framework pro­
gramme to the Community policies strategy and 
objectives 
In its Opinion on the framework programme (1990 to 
1994) the Committee commented on the relevance of 
the Commission R&TD framework programme to the 
Community policies strategy and objectives. 
In particular: 
'The Committee considers the third framework pro­
gramme proposal is technologically isolated. For 
instance it fails to set the R&TD proposals in the 
context the various needs for the improvement of 
the quality of life and to propose global projects 
aimed at effective solutions which will require pol­
itical will of the Community to achieve them.' 
Again: 
'The Committee considers that the current and pro­
posed framework programmes rely to a large extent 
on 'bottom up' proposals. It would like to see in 
No C 332/44 Official Journal of the European Communities 31. 12. 90 
addition a complementary 'top down' approach 
which begins with a definition of a Community 
R&TD policy and strategy based on agreed criteria, 
identifying the work that should be done at Com­
munity level in the light of Member State existing 
and projected programmes, fixing urgencies and 
priorities and finally estimating the funding 
necessary.' 
The Committee considers that these comments on 
the framework proposal overall apply equally to 
the portion or the programme providing for a spec­
ific R&TD programme in the field of life sciences 
and technologies for developing countries. 
4.2. Major objectives for a R&TD policy for 
developing countries 
4.2.1. The Committee envisages that the R&TD 
policy element should include a number of objec­
tives, among which the more important are: 
— to encourage the awareness of the technological 
needs and resources of the developing countries 
in the Community, 
— to encourage programmes of work within the 
Community to meet these needs with solutions 
which take full account of the skills ans 
resources available in the developing countries 
and which are adapted to local conditions, 
— to facilitate transfer of appropriate technologies 
to developing countries regardless of whether or 
not the work was done preeminently for that 
purpose, 
— to create and strengthen links between R&TD 
institutions in the Community and their counter­
parts in developing countries, 
— to promote a training programme for scientists 
from the developing countries, 
— to promote the creation of a R&TD infrastruc-. 
ture of resources in the developing countries to 
ensure as far as is possible that the trained 
scientists will prefer to work in their own 
countries and will be imbued necessity to insti­
gate their own training programmes, 
— to select, organize, manage a number of R&TD 
projects of relevance to developing countries 
within the scope and resources allocated by the 
current framework programme, 
— to promote awareness by and to encourage par­
ticipation in R&TD with the twin objectives of 
harnessing the skill and knowledge available in 
industry at the R&TD stage and utilizing the 
market development abilities of the companies 
and their organizations on the ground in the 
developing countries, — to utilize all available funding including those 
available under the Lome Convention, World 
Bank funding, etc., which are applicable to the 
various aspects of this policy. 
4.3. The 'horizontal' training approach 
4.3.1. The Committee suggests that a very much 
greater emphasis be placed upon training in the 
subjects covered in the scope of the proposal. 
4.3.2. The Commission would set up in the first 
phase a number of training centers in the Com­
munity, to include: 
— agriculture-basic, 
— agriculture-high economic value, 
— medicine, 
— health systems, 
— nutrition, 
— management of tropical forests, 
— rational use of energy resources. 
4.3.3. These would be spread over the Member 
States and could perhaps include the Commission 
site at Ispra. 
4.3.4. They would train students from all 
developing countries to an acknowledged diploma 
standard in one or more of the specific subjects. 
4.3.5. Students would be selected on clearly 
defined principles based on previous performance. 
They would be subject to an agreement involving 
their sponsors that they would return to their coun­
try for a specific period and that a proportion of 
their time would be devoted to training in that 
country. 
4.3.6. They would thus be the 'seed corn' for a 
future generation of training colleges in the individ­
ual countries. 
4.3.7. In due course a pyramidal network of 
training centers would be developed, extending 
from the Community into the developing countries 
and linked together as institutions. 
4.3.8. A number of advantages would accrue: 
a) The limited resources of the Commission for 
science and technology would be concerted and 
spread over all developing countries. 
b) The training could be linked to actual R&TD 
projects which would be used as case studies. In 
due course the training centres could be linked 
into actual projects and be involved in their 
management. 
31. 12. 90 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 332/45 
c) People from all developing countries could be 
trained rather than only the few involved with 
STD projects. 
d) Relevant technology from Member States could 
be disseminated more widely and more quickly. 
e) Trainees would bring to the centres information 
on their local conditions, customs and pro­
cedures. 
f) Training centers would ensure that adequate 
attention was paid to appropriate aspects of 
economic and social research. g) Training would also be provided to enable tech­
nologists to return to their own countries, 
initiate and run local training colleges, including 
the installation and maintenance of the necess­
ary infrastructure. 
h) A wide selection of lectures, including those 
from developing countries, would be used. 
i) Industry would be involved in the teaching, the 
provision of scholarships and the supply of 
equipment. They might also be interested in the 
subsequent employment of graduates in their 
own developing country for operational 
research. 
Done at Brussels, 19 September 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 (R & TD) programme in the field of human capital and mobility 
(90/C 332/12) 
On 6 June 1990, 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 6 September 1990. The 
Rapporteur was Mr Bordes-Pages. 
At its 279th plenary session (meeting of 19 September 1990), the Economic and Social 
Committee adopted the following Opinion unanimously. 
The Committee reiterates its full support for the cre­
ation of a boundary-free European research community 
and for the steps which have already been taken in this 
connection. In addition, the Committee would point out that a 
researchers' Europe cannot be confined to the academic 
sphere or restricted to training initiatives. Other meas­
ures are necessary to promote the development of the 
entire European scientific community. 
Whilst approving the proposed programme in principle, 
the Committee feels that it cannot benefit all the Mem­
ber States unless it forms part of a coherent, general 
policy which is coordinated with other existing and 
proposed Community initiatives designed to reduce the 
technological gap between the least- and most-
developed regions. The Committee also calls on the Commission and the 
Council to ensure that existing activities and training 
schemes conducted under the specific research and tech­
nological development (R&TD) programmes are con­
tinued.