No C 90/4 Official Journal of the European Communities 5. 4. 83 
The Commission proposal should also include a 
procedure for notifying the Member States directly 
affected by programmes. 
2.3. Article 4 
The Committee feels that it would be more logical to 
establish a ceiling percentage for public aid than to 
grant aid at two different rates, according to the 
exploration stage covered by the programme. The 
Article should also contain some reference to 
compatibility with national schemes, as mentioned in 
the general remarks. 
2.4. Article 5 
As the primary aim of the proposal is to lessen the 
Community's dependence on imported supplies, enough 
members of the Committee responsible for assessing 
applications should possess the qualifications and 
expertise needed to appraise not only the technical 
implications but also the cost and supply aspects. 
2.5. Article 6 (4) 
2.5.1. The Committee recommends that a further 
indent be added to the effect that the dissemination of the results of programmes receiving Community aid 
should comply with legal requirements in the Member 
States concerned. 
2.5.2. The Committee also feels that the text of the 
fifth indent should be amended in such a way as to 
permit the recipient(s) of Community aid, with the 
agreement of the Commission, to hand over to third 
parties the results of financially-assisted programmes in 
the four years following their termination, provided that 
the said third parties agree to assume in full the 
obligations which were initially accepted. 
2.5.3. As the Commission proposal is designed to 
safeguard supplies, the Committee recommends that an 
indent be added under Article 6 (4), stipulating that, in 
the event of the results not being used within the 
four-year period, they shall be the property of the 
Commission, which in liaison with Member States will 
attempt to make use of them. 
2.6. Article 7 
As it is difficult to establish a priori criteria for 
non-reimbursement in the event of a Community-aided 
programme proving unsuccessful, the Committee urges 
that Article 7 be amended to state explicitly that 
reimbursement will only be made two years after the 
mine comes into production. 
Done at Brussels, 23 February 1983. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Francois CEYRAC 
Opinion on the proposal for a Council Decision adopting an experimental Community 
action to stimulate the efficacy of the European Economic Community's scientific and 
technical potential 
The text referred to the Committee has been pubished in Official Journal of the European 
Communities No C 337 of 23 December 1982, page 6. 
A. LEGAL BASIS FOR THE OPINION 
On 13 December 1982 the Council referred the abovementioned proposal to the Economic 
and Social Committee in accordance with Article 198 of the Treaty establishing the 
European Economic Community. 
5. 4. 83 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 90/5 
B. OPINION OF THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE 
The Economic and Social Committee prepared its opinion on the above matter at its 
205th plenary session held in Brussels on 23 and 24 February 1983. 
The full text of the opinion is as follows: 
THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE, 2. General comments 
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European 
Economic Community, and in particular Article 198 
thereof, 2.1. The Community has a considerable scientific and 
technical capacity. The aim is to increase the scientific 
competitiveness of this capacity by helping to overcome 
such difficulties as: 
Having regard to the request made by the Council of 
the European Communities on 13 December 1982 for 
an opinion on the proposal for a Council Decision 
adopting an experimental Community action to 
stimulate the efficacy of the European Economic 
Community's scientific and technical potential (1), 
Having regard to the decision taken by its Bureau on 
14 December 1982 instructing the Section for Energy 
and Nuclear Questions to draw up an opinion on the 
matter, the lack of unity between Member State research 
strategies, causing funds to be wasted, 
the excessive compartmentalization of research, 
which makes it difficult for research workers to 
move from one research subject to another, or from 
one research institute to another, 
inadequate dissemination of scientific and technical 
information caused inter alia by language barriers. 
Having regard to the opinion adopted by that Section at 
its 78th meeting held on 4 February 1983, 
Having regard to the oral report made by the 
rapporteur, Mr Bordes-Pages, 
Having regard to the discussions at its meeting of 
23 February 1983 (205th plenary session of 23 and 
24 February 1983), 
HAS ADOPTED THE FOLLOWING OPINION 
unanimously: 
1. The Committee, realizing that research and 
technology are closely linked to the problems facing the 
Community in these difficult social and economic times, 
endorses any action to develop or stimulate the 
Community's scientific and technical potential. 
The Committee approves the draft Council Decision (*) 
and considers that the proposed action must be 
regarded as being complementary to, but free from 
the constraints of, an action programme proper. It also 
has the following comments to make: 2.2. There are of course pitfalls and risks but these can 
easily be avoided if qualified scientific personnel are 
able to direct and monitor activities. The aim is to 
stimulate creativity and discourage non-productive 
contacts. 
2.3. The subject for study will have to be clearly 
defined and precise objectives will have to be set. It is 
not possible for a team of researchers working on a 
research contract to guarantee new discoveries; their 
duty is simply to come up with exact findings, be these 
positive or negative. 
(!) OJ No C 337, 23. 12. 1982, p. 6. 3. Specific comments 
3.1. Subjects In its communication to the Council on 
scientific and technical research and the European 
Community: proposals for the 1980s (October 1981), 
the Commission stresses the need to 'give deeper 
thought to the mastering of the relationship between 
technological progress and social change'. The 
Committee is concerned about the impact in particular 
of information technology, robotics and office 
automation and regrets that this subject has not been 
included in the experimental phase. 
No C 90/6 Official Journal of the European Communities 5.4.83 
3.2. Experimental aspect and methodological work 
The Committee warmly approves the thinking behind 
the proposal to establish an experimental model before 
launching 'stimulatory action': accordingly, it hopes 
that the methodological work accompanying the 
research activities will be continued throughout the 
experimental phase. This is the only way to identify 
strengths and weaknesses. For this reason the 
Committee indicates below the aspects on which this 
accompanying work should focus. 
3.3. Method testing The priority given to this 
objective meets with the Committee's approval; 
consequently the Committee regrets that the document 
does not define these methods precisely enough, just as 
it fails to give an adequate explanation of the nature of 
the 'tests' and of the success and failure criteria. 
3.4 Examination procedure — evaluation of findings 
The Committee is pleased that the experimental phase is 
to include the creation of a network of scientific 
consultants within the Community. 
Although the Committee recommends that everything 
be done to avoid the unwieldiness inherent in any 
institutional set-up, it feels that it is necessary to 
establish a committee (Codest), as a concrete 
manifestation of the Community commitment to R & D 
which is already evident in the Framework Programme 
(1984 to 1987). The Committee also believes that the 
scientific consultant should be asked to rationalize their 
methods for evaluating finding. It must be remembered 
that there is a real, paradoxical risk of scientific matters 
being evaluated subjectively, especially when new 
findings go against conventional wisdom. 
The Committee attaches great importance to: 
— the efficient transmission of information during the 
experimental phase, 
— the need to get work off the ground as soon as 
possible so as to shorten the decision-making 
process. 
3.5. Funds These seem to be adequate for the 
purposes of the experimental model. The Committee 
recommends that the money allocated for research staff be spent on scientists who have a steady job in their 
country of origin; the Committee would also like to see 
the 'pooling' aims (workshops, studies, twinning, 
conferences) spelled out for each research subject, so as 
to stimulate creativity and get results rather than just 
encouraging contacts. 
The aim of decentralizing management is certainly to be 
welcomed in principle; but steps should be taken to 
coordinate management procedures so as to be able to 
'test methods' on a standridzed basis. 
3.6. Choice of areas and subjects for the experimental 
phase 
It would be desirable to spell out more clearly which 
scientific disciplines and sub-disciplines are likely to be 
involved in the study of specific subjects. This would 
highlight the inter-disciplinary aspect. 
3.7. Socio-economic impact The Committee is pleased 
to note that the experimental phase makes a start on 
tackling problems such as the types of agreement for the 
protection of intellectual or industrial property at 
Community level. 
4. Conclusion 
4.1. In conclusion, the Committee appreciates the 
flexibility of the 'stimulatory action' envisaged. The 
Committee also attaches special importance to the 
statement that the Outline Plan can be changed in the 
light of the outcome of the experimental phase so that, 
if the latter is as successful as expected, the proven 
methods can be used in further larger-scale schemes. The 
Committee regrets, however, that we are offered only a 
glimpse of the Outline Plan in the Framework 
Programme. 
4.2. Whilst recognizing the value of the subjects 
selected, the Committee notes to its great regret that the 
social sciences are not represented; at a time when the 
'social' element is of overwhelming importance, the 
Committee finds it difficult to understand why a subject 
relating to social change has not been selected for this 
exploratory phase. This is especially true if priority is to 
be given to 'method testing', since 'method testing' 
cannot be done without sociological analysis in the new 
area called 'The Science of Science'. 
4.3. In approving the draft Council Decision the 
Committee considers that there must be a genuine 
'follow-up' to the experimental phase and that the 
5.4.83 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 90/7 
Committee should be consulted when the assessment of 
methods and findings becomes possible. Only if it has 
been informed progressively and fully, will the 
Done at Brussels, 23 February 1983. 
THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE, 
Having regard to the fourth paragraph of Article 20 of 
the Rules of Procedure conferring on it the right of 
initiative, 
Having regard to the decision taken by its Bureau on 
27 April 1982 instructing the Section for Regional 
Development to draw up an opinion on the ERDF's 
seventh annual report, 
Having regard to the delay in the submission of this 
report and the organization of Section work on 
12 November 1982 including the appointment of Mr 
Broicher as rapporteur, 
Having regard to the opinion adopted by the Section 
for Regional Development at its meeting held on 
11 February 1983, 
Having regard to the discussions on 23 February 1983 
during the plenary session held on 23 and 24 February 
1983, Committee be able to assess the situation when the time 
comes for the final verdict on the experimental phase 
and the move to the operational phase. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Francois CEYRAC 
Whereas it was necessary to make the usual annual 
assessment of the activities of the ERDF, 
HAS ADOPTED THE FOLLOWING OPINION 
unanimously: 
1. General comments 
1.1. Community regional policy and the economic 
situation 
1.1.1. 1981 saw a sharp rise in unemployment in the 
Community with the 10 million mark passed by the end 
of the year. Despite the hopes raised in the seventh 
annual report, unemployment increased in 1982 and 
will mount even further in 1983. Nor is it only the Opinion on the European Regional Development Fund's seventh annual report 
A. LEGAL BASIS FOR THE OPINION 
At its 197th plenary session held on 28 and 29 April 1982 the Committee, acting on a 
proposal from the Bureau, decided to deliver an opinion on the abovementioned subject on 
its own initiative. 
B. OPINION OF THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE 
The Economic and Social Committee prepared its opinion on the above matter at is 205th 
plenary session held in Brussels on 23 and 24 February 1983. 
The full text of the opinion is as follows: