Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the "Proposal for a Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the multiannual framework programme 2002-2006 of the European Community for research, technological development and demonstration activities aimed at contributing towards the creation of the European Research Area"
Date: 2001-11-15
Institutions: European Committee of the Regions
Subjects: EU programme, EU research policy, technological change

3.5.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 107/111

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the ‘Proposal for a Decision of the European
Parliament and of the Council concerning the multiannual framework programme 2002-2006 of
the European Community for research, technological development and demonstration activities
aimed at contributing towards the creation of the European Research Area’

(2002/C 107/32)

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS,

having regard to the Proposal for a Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning
the European Community for research,
the multiannual
technological development and demonstration activities aimed at contributing towards the creation of
the European Research Area (COM(2001) 94 final — 2001/0053 COD);

framework programme 2002-2006 of

having regard to the decision taken by the Council of the European Union on 30 April 2001 to consult
the Committee of the Regions in accordance with Article 265(1) ECT;

having regard to the decision taken by the CoR president on 22 May 2001 to instruct Commission 5 for
Social Policy, Public Health, Consumer Protection, Research and Tourism to prepare the opinion;

having regard to the Commission Communication ‘Towards a European research area’ (COM(2000) 6
final) and the opinion of the Committee of the Regions on this communication (CdR 33/2000 fin (1));

having regard to the Commission Communication ‘Making a reality of the European Research Area:
guidelines for EU research activities (2002-2006)’ (COM(2000) 612 final) and the opinion of the
Committee of the Regions on this communication (CdR 63/2001 fin (2));

having regard to the decision of the European summit in Gothenburg to add a sustainability dimension
to the Lisbon process and to call expressly upon the research sector to make an effective contribution to
this;

having regard to the Commission staff working paper ‘First report on progress towards the European
research and innovation area’ (SEC(2001) 465);

having regard to the Proposals for Council decisions concerning the specific programmes implementing
the framework programme 2002-2006 of
technological
development and demonstration activities, and concerning the specific programmes implementing the
framework programme 2002-2006 of the European Atomic Energy Community for research and training
activities (COM(2001) 279 final);

the European Community for research,

having regard to the Commission communication ‘The framework programme and the European
Research Area: application of Article 169 and the networking of national programmes’ (COM(2001) 282
final);

having regard to the Commission communication ‘A mobility strategy for the European Research Area’
(COM(2001) 331 final);

having regard to the Commission communication ‘The international dimension of the European Research
Area’ (COM(2001) 346 final);

having regard to the Commission staff working paper ‘Progress report on benchmarking of national
research policies’ (SEC(2001) 1002);

having regard to the Commission staff working paper ‘How to map excellence in research and
technological development in Europe’ (SEC(2001) 434);

having regard to the conclusions of the Council of 26 June on progress in the discussions on the 6th
framework programme and the Presidency’s conclusions on the orientation debate on the Commission’s
proposal for the framework programme 2002-2006;

(1) OJ C 226, 8.8.2001, p. 18.
(2) OJ C 357, 14.12.2001, p. 15.

C 107/112

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

3.5.2002

having regard to the Council resolution of 26 June 2001 on ‘Science and society and on women in
science’;

having regard to the draft opinion (CdR 283/2001 rev.) adopted by Commission 5 on 10 September
2001 (rapporteur Erwin Teufel — D/EPP, Prime Minister of the Land of Baden-Württemberg);

having regard to the fact that the Commission envisaged the 6th framework programme as an instrument
for achieving the European Research Area;

having regard to the importance attached by the Lisbon European Council to establishing a European
Research Area in order to strengthen an economy based on innovation and knowledge with more and
better jobs and greater social cohesion;

having regard to the fact that the Stockholm European Council confirmed the strategies for the European
Research Area, called on the Commission and the Member States to build a knowledge-based society in
Europe and laid particular stress on training, the Europe-wide acquisition of IT skills and an in-depth
discussion within the Community on the ethical aspects of biotechnology research projects;

having regard to the progress already made by the European Community towards a European Research
Area;

having regard to the fact that the EC’s research programmes have become a permanent fixture in the
regional and national promotion of research, and represent more than just the provision and use of
additional funds from Community coffers;

having regard to the challenges which the European Union has to meet before eastwards enlargement in
2004 (European Charter, institutional reforms, new distribution of competences between European,
national and regional decisionmakers and players),

adopted the following opinion at its 41st plenary session on 14 and 15 November 2001 (meeting of
15 November).

1. Objectives

The Committee of the Regions

1.1.
supports the Commission’s intention to use the 6th
RTD framework programme to reinforce research and techno-
logical development and to work towards the creation of
a European Research Area dedicated to strengthening the
Community’s competitiveness. Hence the decisive criteria for
the selection of eligible projects must be the scientific excel-
lence, economic relevance and social value of the research
concerned;

1.2.
doubts, however, whether the objectives associated
with the European Research Area can be achieved through the
framework programme 2002-2006, unless the Commission
and the Member States agree to accord RTD a higher priority
in Community policymaking and provide substantially higher
funding than in the past;

1.4.
objects to the fact that the Commission wishes to
restrict the collaboration of the Member States and regions in
the implementation of the 1st specific programme to a single
programme committee;

recommends that, with regard to the proposal for
1.5.
nuclear research, special account be taken of the concerns of
the population which are focused on storage sites, the disposal
of nuclear waste, radiation protection and nuclear safety;

reiterates its demand for gender equality in access to

1.6.
scientific projects and aid;

1.7.
urges that at the latest by the 7th research framework
programme, the duration of the programme be extended to
bring it into line with the Community’s education and culture
programmes, so as to offer the Member States, regions and all
those involved in research greater planning certainty.

1.3.
welcomes the Commission’s intention to strengthen
the dynamic role of regional and local authorities in the
implementation of
the programme and to upgrade their
contribution to research in Europe;

In order to provide for greater flexibility in a framework
programme with a longer timeframe, account should be taken
of Community benchmarking of research and innovation
policy, and of the forthcoming mapping of scientific excellence
in Europe for research areas in which particularly rapid
progress is being achieved on the knowledge front.

3.5.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 107/113

2. Local and regional authorities (1)

The Committee of the Regions

2.1.
confirms the intention of the regions, especially those
with legislative powers in respect of research, to make a
contribution to setting up the European Research Area and
implementing the 6th research framework programme;

2.2.
points to the crucial role played by the regions in
training the new generation of scientists in universities,
in maintaining and expanding public and private research
institutions, and in shaping regional research policy and the
general conditions under which small and medium-sized
enterprises (SMEs) operate. The Committee of the Regions
would also refer to the experience of regions which have
implemented RIS (‘Innovation Regions in Europe Network’) in
cooperation with other EU regions;

2.3.
recognises the need to strengthen cooperation between
regions by forming interregional networks for grouping
research activities;

2.4.
calls on the Commission to support financially the
development of interregional partnerships with the applicant
countries of central and eastern Europe;

2.5.
supports the Commission’s intention to boost the
Community’s research effort by networking top-flight scien-
tists and research groups, but urges the Commission also to
use the Structural Funds to create research infrastructure in the
less favoured regions, thereby qualifying them to participate in
outstanding and forward-looking research projects;

2.6.
supports the Commission’s intention (a) to influence
the future course of R&D in Europe by structuring and
coordinating it, (b) to raise the efficiency of European research
by exploiting the synergies from related programmes in the
Member States, and (c) to encourage the Member States and
regions to cooperate to this end. This policy must, however,
adhere strictly to the principle of subsidiarity.

3. Bodies responsible, including in the regions

The Committee of the Regions

stresses that universities are centres for training young
3.1.
scientists and — together with regional research establishments
— for undertaking basic and applied research and that their

(1) For simplicity’s sake ‘regions’ should be understood to cover both

regional and local authorities in this opinion.

appropriate involvement in the projects covered by the 6th
framework programme must be ensured;

3.2.
therefore expressly calls on the Commission to main-
tain the current additional costs arrangements for universities
and non-university research establishments, in order to ensure
the participation of these establishments in the implementation
of the 6th framework programme;

3.3.
reiterates that SMEs play an important role in European
enterprise and innovation policy and that the 6th framework
programme should create an adequate environment for them.
The Committee therefore advocates maintaining a horizontal
programme for innovation and SME involvement;

3.4.
welcomes the clear reinforcement of the SME-specific
instruments (cooperative research and collective research), but
thinks that these instruments should be made more user-
friendly. This would include in particular opening them up to
enterprises with their own research departments, the inclusion
of preliminary costs in the eligible project costs and main-
taining the exploratory awards;

endorses the Commission’s intention of earmarking
3.5.
about 15 % of the framework programme’s funds for assisting
SMEs, but would advocate looking at the quality of the projects
and the Europe-wide use and dissemination of their findings
as key conditions for the award of the funds.

4. Themes

The Committee of the Regions

4.1.
expects the Commission to pursue the problem-
oriented approach introduced in the 5th framework pro-
gramme (especially consideration of the impact of the new
technologies on people) and not to give the priority themes an
exclusively technological slant;

4.2.
states that from the point of view of the regions,
the Commission’s proposal has major shortcomings. On
environmental and economic grounds, and with reference to
the objectives of the European Research Area, the Committee
of the Regions considers it essential that projects also be
promoted in the fields of agricultural, marine, energy and
transport research. In addition, there must be a sound balance
between scientific and technical research and sociological
research. The socio-economic and ethical aspects should be
incorporated as an overriding requirement in all projects in
the priority areas.

C 107/114

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

3.5.2002

5. Programme structure

6. New instruments

The Committee of the Regions

The Committee of the Regions

5.1.
considers the scope of the 1st specific programme as
proposed by the Commission far too vast and its organisation
too unwieldy for a single programme committee to supervise;

5.2.
calls on the Commission to maintain the distinction
between vertical areas and horizontal measures, which proved
its worth in the Fifth Framework Programme, and thus to
structure the Framework Programme more clearly, as follows:

by incorporating all vertical areas into the first
5.2.1.
specific programme as actions, each with its own programme
committee, and thus drawing clear demarcation lines between
different areas. The Committee suggests establishing a total of
six actions, namely:

— Genomics and biotechnology for health, in conjunction

with food safety and health risks,

— Information society technologies,

— Nanotechnologies, materials and production,

— Aeronautics and space,

6.1.
considers that, in the interests of continuity and in
order to ensure a seamless transition from the Fifth to the
Sixth Research Framework Programme, those instruments
which have proved their worth in the Fourth and Fifth
Framework Programmes should in principle be retained, so
that smaller institutions supported by the regions and SMEs
can continue to participate in the Sixth Framework Pro-
gramme, thus allowing their innovative power to be harnessed
for the purposes of development;

also recognises, however,

6.2.
is both possible
and necessary to combine research capacity and to achieve
outstanding results in order to strengthen the Community’s
competitiveness, but asks that any large projects planned
comply with the following conditions:

that

it

6.2.1.
projects must remain manageable. It must be ensured
that participating researchers make the agreed contributions
and that the direct internal and external exchange of findings
and experience is maintained and encouraged;

6.2.2. minimum project size should not be a precondition
for funding eligibility;

— Sustainable development and global change, and

— Politically orientated research, citizens and governance in

the knowledge-based society and science/society;

when assessing the suitability of, and need for, new
6.2.3.
instruments,
the critical mass and European added value
achievable should be evaluated on the basis of objective
standards;

5.2.2.
by bringing together in a second specific programme
all horizontal measures as separate actions, each with its own
programme committee, in the interests of a clearer structure.
To this end the Committee suggests a total of four actions,
namely:

6.2.4.
universities, smaller regional institutions and enter-
prises must be able to participate, provide appropriate initiat-
ives and secure their users’ rights when new instruments are to
be established;

— Human resources and mobility,

considers five years a suitable lifespan for the networks

6.3.
of excellence;

— Coherent development and coordination of Community
and national research policies and infrastructures,

— International cooperation, and

— Research, innovation and SME-specific measures;

6.4.
calls for a clear definition of the responsibilities of
integrated project coordinators, the demarcation of technical
and administrative responsibility and 100 % financing of
coordination costs;

recommends that the Commission incorporate the
5.3.
proposed planning reserve into the above vertical actions, and
in addition retain 5 % of total Framework Programme funding
for unforeseen developments, allowing the programme com-
mittee for Coherent development and coordination of Com-
munity and national research policies and infrastructures to
decide how the funds are deployed.

6.5.
as this is the first Commission proposal to invoke
Article 169 ECT, stresses that more than 80 % of public-sector
research work is carried out under regional or national research
programmes and that a significant proportion thereof already
has a European dimension (e.g. EUREKA, COST, European
Science Foundation). The Committee therefore calls on the
Commission, when invoking Article 169 ECT, to comply with
the following conditions;

3.5.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 107/115

the approach should be as flexible as possible, with
6.5.1.
account being taken of bottom-up initiatives,
in order to
stimulate cooperation between the regions of different Member
States or between different states in the same European
region (1);

initially the ‘simpler’ instruments (e.g. information
6.5.2.
exchange, opening up of programmes on a reciprocal basis,
joint actions etc.) should be tried out before the Community
implementation of regional or national programmes is con-
sidered.

This would make it easier to improve coordination between the
research framework programmes, regional Structural Funds
programmes and other initiatives which are included in the
Lisbon agreements;

the Community implementation of

6.5.3.
in view of coordination difficulties, the administrative
burden involved and the need to protect intellectual property
regional and
rights,
national research programmes should be restricted to a
few pilot projects with a global dimension and undisputed
relevance to the protection of human health, the environment
and world peace;

7.3.
acknowledges the Commission’s desire to develop a
strategy for promoting mobility in the European research area,
but regrets that the Commission has got no further than
outlining the overall problems. The Committee welcomes the
increase in funding for the promotion of mobility, supports
the extension of the Marie Curie programme and notes without
satisfaction that the promotion of doctoral research is to be
another priority;

7.4.
welcomes the decision of the Council to deepen the
debate on the role of science in society to give the issues a
higher public profile and to strengthen links between research
policies and the needs of society (2), but calls on the Com-
mission to give as much freedom as possible to the regional
players in the dialogue between the scientific community and
society at large;

notes the Commission’s intention to give the European
7.5.
research area a more international dimension, and expects it
to develop further the planned measures for international
cooperation, and the integration of the applicant countries and
to designate a specific contact point for this purpose;

the existing provisions for

6.5.4.
funding research at
regional and Member State level should be observed. The EU
co-financing criteria should be laid down, with due regard to
aid and WTO rules, in order to ensure that participants do not
encounter legal or financial problems as a result of duplication
of funding.

7.6.
applauds the Commission’s plan to establish a forum
for international scientific and technical relations in order
to secure the necessary coordination between participants.
Representatives of the Committee of the Regions should also
be involved in this.

7.

Flanking measures

The Committee of the Regions

8. Management

The Committee of the Regions

welcomes the Commission’s proposal to develop with
7.1.
the Member States a reliable, objective and transparent method
for the geographic mapping of outstanding achievements in
research and technological development. As this is a long-term
process which is to be continually optimised and progressively
extended beyond the disciplines initially selected (biosciences,
nanotechnologies and economics), this task should be entrust-
ed to a programme committee under the Decision on Com-
mittee Procedure;

7.2.
assumes that, when developing benchmarking indi-
cators, the Commission will in future continue to work closely
with the Member States and regions, in order to ensure that
only indicators will be used which can be compiled without
substantial additional work and whose application will pro-
duce usable results;

8.1.
welcomes the Commission’s intention to tighten up,
simplify and at the same time enhance the efficiency of the
Sixth Research Framework Programme, and calls on the
Commission to adopt appropriate measures. These would
include the general introduction of a two-stage application
procedure on the basis of a brief project sketch, 100 %
financing of the costs of transferring management to the
coordinators of networks and integrated projects, separation
of administrative and technical responsibility among integrated
project coordinators and instead of avoiding setting up new
bureaucratic structures, using existing regional and national
structures for the management of support and the adminis-
tration of funding;

(1) Communication from the Commission on the application of

Article 169, COM(2001) 282 final.

(2) Council Resolution on making a reality of the European area of
research and innovation: guidelines for the European Union’s
research activities (2002-2006), 28.12.2000, OJ C 374.

C 107/116

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

3.5.2002

8.2.
calls on the Commission to retain the bulk of the
participation rules and implementing provisions newly nego-
tiated in the Fifth Framework Programme and to develop these
further for the Sixth Framework Programme, so that the
regional players are not required to provide excessive initial
funding, coordinators are not burdened with unacceptable
liability risks and the ongoing concerns of scientists, universiti-
es, research institutions and firms in respect of the protection
of intellectual property rights are allayed;

8.3.
expects the Commission to submit its proposals for
the participation rules and implementing provisions at an early
date (1) and to convene the programme committee established
under Article 167 ECT as soon as possible;

8.4.
asks the Commission to improve coordination of
actions to support SMEs, cooperation between the relevant
DGs, and cooperation between bodies providing services to
SMEs (e.g. Innovation Relay Centres) and the national contact
points.

9.

Financing

The Committee of the Regions

9.2.
points out that, although the Community decided as
far back as 1985 that 6 % of the overall budget should be
earmarked for the Framework Programme, this has so far not
been achieved;

9.3.
regrets that the bulk of the increased funding for
the Sixth Research Framework Programme proposed by the
Commission is allocated to coordination tasks in the European
research area and to the Community policies, and that funding
for individual research areas is hardly to be increased at all, or
even cut;

9.4.
points out that the ambitious sustainability targets of
the Gothenburg Summit cannot be achieved if funding for
traffic and energy research is not on a par with that available
under the Fifth Framework Programme. The necessary funding
of some EUR 1,100 million would have to be obtained from
economies or additional financing (e.g. at the expense of an
coordinating
increase
measures);

research infrastructure

and

for

points out that successful implementation of the Sixth
9.1.
Research Framework Programme’s priorities depends on the
allocation of appropriate funding;

(1) The first clause should be deleted if the European Commission
has already submitted the participation rules and implementing
provisions by the time this draft is discussed by CoR Commission
5.

finally, points out that additional funding will have to
9.5.
be provided for the administration of the new instruments
which is financially equivalent
to the savings which the
Commission intends to make by slimming down its bureauc-
racy and delegating tasks. Otherwise, contrary to the Com-
mission’s political guidelines, research funding would actually
be reduced by this amount, compared with the Fifth Frame-
work Programme.

Brussels, 15 November 2001.

The President

of the Committee of the Regions

Jos CHABERT