Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the Proposal for a Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the seventh framework programme of the European Community for research, technological development and demonstration activities (2007-2013)
Date: 2005-11-16
Institutions: European Committee of the Regions
Subjects: EU programme, EU research policy, applied research, diffusion of innovations, ecology, population ageing, research staff, social analysis

C 115/20

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

16.5.2006

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the Proposal for a Decision of the European Parlia-
ment and of the Council concerning the seventh framework programme of the European Com-
munity for research, technological development and demonstration activities (2007-2013)

(2006/C 115/05)

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS,

Having regard to the Proposal for a Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning
the seventh framework programme of the European Community for research, technological development
and demonstration activities (2007 to 2013) (COM(2005) 119 final) — 2005/0043 (COD) — 2005/0044
(CNS);

Having regard to the Communication from the Commission: Building the ERA of knowledge for growth
(COM (2005) 118 final);

Having regard to the decision of the Council of 31 March 2005 to consult it on this subject, under the
first paragraph of Article 265 of the Treaty establishing the European Community;

Having regard to the decision of its President of 19 May 2005 to instruct the Commission for Culture
and Education to draw up an opinion on this subject;

Having regard to the Decision of the 2000 Lisbon European Council to adopt the concept of a European
Research Area (ERA), thereby laying the foundation for common science and technology policy across the
European Union;

Having regard to the Decision of the March 2002 Barcelona European Council by which the European
Union set itself the objective of increasing the European research effort to 3 % of the European Union's
GDP by 2010;

Having regard to the Communication from the Commission: A European initiative for growth —
Investing in networks and knowledge for growth and employment — final report to the European Council
(COM(2003) 690 final);

Having regard to the Communication from the Commission: Science and technology, the key to Europe's
future — guidelines for future European policy to support research in Europe (COM(2004) 353 final) and
its opinion on the subject (CdR 194/2004 fin) (1);

Having regard to the Communication from the Commission responding to the observations and recom-
mendations of the high-level Panel of independent experts concerning the new instruments of the Sixth
Framework Programme (COM(2004) 574 final);

Having regard to the Communication to the Spring European Council: Working together for growth and
jobs — a new start for the Lisbon Strategy (COM(2005) 24 final);

Having regard to the Proposal for a Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing
a Competitiveness and Innovation Framework Programme (2007-2013)
(COM(2005) 121 final —
2005/0050 (COD));

Having regard to the Communication from the Commission: Mobilising the brainpower of Europe:
enabling universities to make their full contribution to the Lisbon Strategy (COM(2005) 152 final) and its
opinion on the subject (CdR 154/2005 fin);

Having regard to the report of the High-level Expert Panel chaired by professor Ramon Marimon Evalua-
tion of the effectiveness of the New Instruments of Framework Programme VI (21 June 2004);

Having regard to the opinion (CdR 155/2005 rev. 2) adopted on 22 September by its Commission for
Culture and Education (rapporteur: Mr Lars Nordström, Regional Councillor, Region of Västra Götaland
(SE/ALDE);

(1) OJ C 71, 22.3.2005, p. 22.

16.5.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 115/21

Whereas:

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

the overarching objectives set out in the Commission proposal are crucial for the implementation of
the Lisbon Strategy. Raising European investment in research to 3 % of EU GDP, with two-thirds of
this coming from the private sector and all of it geared to research and development promoting
knowledge-based societies and economies in Europe, is an ambitious target that can only be met
through joint efforts and coordinated action by the EU and Member States;

research, innovation and lifelong learning are key to European growth and competitiveness;

the need to double Union research funding in the period 2007–2013 is in line with the objectives
of the Lisbon Strategy and the accession of ten new Member States in 2004. It is in the interest of
the whole of Europe that the proposal be implemented, even if changes are made to other parts of
the budget plans for 2007–2013;

the high degree of continuity between the current Sixth Framework Programme (2002-2006) and
the forthcoming Seventh Framework Programme. The proposal also includes new elements, such as
the European Research Council and Joint Technology Initiatives;

although the measures contained in the Commission proposal are not cohesion instruments as such,
they will undoubtedly have an impact on cohesion in Europe;

unanimously adopted the following opinion at its 62nd plenary session, held on 16-17 November
2005 (meeting of 16 November):

The Committee of the Regions' views

impact assessment based on evaluations and inputs from the
interested parties;

1. General comments

The Committee of the Regions

1.1 welcomes the fact
that the political context and
objectives of this proposal are set out in a separate communi-
cation Building the ERA of knowledge for growth, which was
presented at the same time by the Commission;

that,

believes

1.2
the Commission's
in the main,
proposal is good in that it has a high degree of continuity
with the current Framework Programme. Local and regional
authorities and small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) are
given better opportunities to participate, although FP7 instru-
ments continue to favour ‘large initiatives’;

in view of the relaunch of the Lisbon agenda, stresses
1.3
the importance of reaching an agreement on the financial
perspectives
the
7th Framework Programme as proposed by the Commission;

the necessary financing for

that allows

1.4 welcomes the measures aimed at administrative, finan-
cial and legal simplification, which are described in the
Working Document on implementation accompanying the
proposal, and would particularly highlight the need for
simplification at all stages of
the application procedure,
contractual negotiations and implementation;

1.6
agrees that knowledge is at the core of the Lisbon
Strategy and that the components of the ‘Triangle of knowl-
edge’ are innovation, education and research; would particu-
larly stress that the quest for quality and excellence lies at
the heart of research policy. In this way, knowledge can be
produced which promotes
economic growth,
employment and social cohesion;

sustainable

1.7
endorses the Programme's overarching objectives and
the division of the Seventh Framework Programme into four
specific programmes — Cooperation, Ideas, People and Capaci-
ties — corresponding to the four major objectives of European
research policy;

1.8 welcomes the focus of the Cooperation programme on a
few thematic areas for all types of transnational cooperation,
ranging from collaborative projects and networks to the coordi-
nation of research programmes in the following thematic areas:

a) Health

b) Food, Agriculture and Biotechnology

c) Information and Communication Technologies

d) Nanosciences, Nanotechnologies, Materials and new Produc-

tion Technologies

1.5
notes that the Commission has taken into account the
views expressed by many of the interested parties in a broad
is built on an in-depth
consultation and that the proposal

e) Energy

f) Environment (including Climate Change)

C 115/22

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

16.5.2006

g) Transport (including Aeronautics)

h) Socio-economic Sciences and the Humanities

i) Security and Space;

services sector, science and technology, including security and
defence. Compared to Japan and the USA in particular, Europe
has considerable ground to make up, not least in view of the
need for supercomputers in many important fields, such as
climate, security and materials research and the synthesis of
new medicines.

for

has high hopes

the Ideas programme, which
1.9
provides for the creation of an autonomous European Research
Council (ERC) to support investigator-driven ‘frontier-research’
carried out by individual teams competing in all scientific and
technological fields; would stress the importance of an inde-
pendent ERC and the need for results from research funded via
the ERC to be disseminated systematically in full cooperation
with local and regional authorities. The idea of a European
Research Council should be developed to have close contacts
with local and regional administration and the CoR;

the

the People programme
1.10 welcomes
for the training and career
provides for increased support
development of researchers, with a focus on skills and career
development and stronger links with national systems;

that

fact

for

as regards the Capacities programme, recalls the
1.11
specific needs
Framework
cooperation between the
Programme and the Structural Funds in order to enhance
research, training and innovation capacity in Europe in the
context of support for research infrastructures, research for the
benefit of SMEs, regional research-driven clusters, unlocking
research potential in the EU's ‘convergence’ regions, ‘science in
society’ issues and ‘horizontal’ activities in the field of interna-
tional cooperation;

1.12
Europe must strive for the best integration of the new
Member States. Inclusion in all EU policies and instruments is a
prerequisite for effectively tapping the significant human and
economic potential of these countries to build a more competi-
tive and cohesive Europe, enjoying sustained development. The
Framework Programmes should help accelerate the process of
integration.

2.3
As regards the ecological dimension of sustainable devel-
opment, the Committee of the Regions wishes to draw atten-
the natural environment as a
tion to the importance of
resource and an area for research in fields such as bio-energy
and biofuels, plant genomics, wood technology, sustainable
forestry, mining technology, waste technology and tourism.

2.4
The CoR reiterates its strong satisfaction at the re-incor-
poration of the important energy sub-programme into FP7.
However, even though energy research is also a very high
priority for Euratom FP7, even greater emphasis on this vital
subject is necessary. Energy is the key resource of a competitive
economy, but, as is well known, Europe is worryingly depen-
dent on energy imports.

2.5
This should be complemented by a focus on the social
dimension and here the Committee of the Regions would parti-
cularly highlight integration issues as a key overarching theme.
Examples of important research questions in this context are
how integration policy is implemented and monitored in
Member States; what targets and indicators are employed; how
tax policy affects integration efforts (in many Member States
taxes are raised at national level but the local and regional level
has to bear a major part of the costs resulting from exclusion,
etc.). Other important questions relate to democratic aspects of
integration efforts, such as the effects of the formal right to
vote or differences in the approach to integration policy at
different levels in society. Another set of questions relates to
refugees and discrimination in the labour market.

2. Cooperation programme

2.1
The issue of knowledge transfer and dissemination is
crucial. The current Framework Programme contains mechan-
isms for this purpose but does knowledge transfer and dissemi-
nation take place effectively and systematically? What results
have been achieved to date? Little is known about this because
there is no clear requirement
for follow-up. One way to
remedy this would be for approved projects to be given an
explicit responsibility for devising and implementing knowl-
edge transfer strategies. The Commission should monitor these
in order to determine the results achieved.

2.2
of key importance to all aspects of

Information and communication technologies (ICT) are
industry, business, the

The CoR welcomes the beginning of the construction of
2.6
the Galileo project; besides being of great value in terms of
innovation,
the technological solutions employed here and
especially their application are, in the Committee's view, what
makes this project truly multi-disciplinary and cross-functional.

The Committee of the Regions believes that research on
2.7
broad issues relating to public health, health care and social
services should be included in the thematic research priorities
of pan-European interest. Other
issues also need to be
addressed, including various aspects of public health, such as,
for example, measures to tackle the harmful consequences of
alcohol and tobacco use. Knowledge of the extent and effects
of alcohol and tobacco-related problems is important, both in
the short and long term.

16.5.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 115/23

2.8 Moreover, research on many aspects of urban develop-
ment, in addition to environmental concerns, needs to be taken
into account. Such research could, for example, cover not only
issues relating to transport, urban planning and water and
waste management, cultural heritage and tourism but also inte-
gration and governance. These issues were included in the Fifth
Framework Programme but are missing from the Sixth Frame-
work Programme. A broader approach to urban development
is therefore called for in the Seventh Framework Programme.

enhanced. The concept of ageing incorporates social, economic
and cultural aspects. The development of social solutions and
adaptation strategies in response to demographic change is one
of the main political challenges facing us over the next few
years, particularly at regional level. Therefore it is also impor-
tant that the local and regional
level play a major role in
designing national programmes.

2.9
The Committee of the Regions believes that the interac-
tion between research and practice is an important area for
research. A major challenge for both the public and the private
sector is the ability to translate research-based knowledge into
practice, for example in order to revamp the welfare system. In
theory this applies to all research areas but perhaps above all
to new knowledge in the service sectors. Thus more research
needs to done into the practical application of research results.
Examples of the kind of questions such research could address
are: developing methodology on the use of research results;
obstacles to change; reasons why some improvement strategies
work and others do not; how to promote change through
learning; how to involve colleagues; how to use proposal
systems to develop a creative climate, etc. Hence there is a
need for European research policy to highlight the fact that the
interaction between research and practice is a field of research
which can promote innovation or development. The EU should
recognise this and support the establishment of this type of
research in the service sectors.

2.10
On the one hand, there is a need for national research
programmes on various aspects of demographic change,
including ageing, and it is important to improve the coordina-
tion of such programmes at European level. The Committee
believes that instruments for programme coordination could be
developed through interregional cooperation projects under the
ERA-NET scheme with an eye to future cooperation in accord-
ance with Article 169. On the other hand, support for research
on demographic ageing should be given a significant boost
through the Seventh Framework Programme itself. Potentially
relevant issues relating to ‘active ageing’ are addressed in the
Commission communication Increasing the employment of older
workers and delaying the exit from the labour market. However,
active ageing involves much more than this; for example, there
is a need to develop knowledge on healthy ageing people and
how older people are and can become an asset to society.
There is a diversity of cultural differences and experiences
among Member States as regards attitudes towards demo-
graphic change, and this could serve as a basis for addressing a
range of research issues from an inter-disciplinary perspective.
Besides the implications of an insufficient birth rate, emigration
and dramatic population shrinkage, this includes research on
ageing which assesses the requirements as regards health care,
social services and self-care. Though coordination between
national and European programmes is mentioned in the Coop-
it should be
eration programme,

the Committee feels that

The Committee of the Regions feels that

2.11
the links
innovation, entrepreneurship and business
between research,
have become unclear with the division of measures between
the Framework Programme and the Competitiveness and Inno-
vation Programme (CIP). There is a danger here that project
ideas on the borderline between these key areas, which are
crucial for growth and job creation, could be overlooked or
become caught up in excessive red tape or, in the worst case,
that potential applicants might be deterred from applying at all,
which is something Europe simply cannot afford. It is of the
utmost importance that the Commission as a whole work to
ensure that administrative boundaries between different DGs
and programmes do not hold back good projects.

2.12
Because of the responsibility they bear for key sectors
of society, local and regional authorities could usefully become
involved in Technology Platforms (TPs). In formulating research
strategies for new TPs from the perspective of people's needs
and in developing relevant platforms already in operation, local
and regional authorities have a natural place in the cooperation
between academia,
the business community and the public
sector which TPs require. Some TPs could take on board the
development of local and regional activities. TPs are long-term
initiatives, but they are built on long-established technology
fields rather than citizens' basic needs.

involved

2.13
Given the importance of towns and cities and local
and regional authorities in promoting economic and social
development for their citizens and local area, they must be
continuous
fully
learning
programmes, both in terms of
role as catalysts for
promoting partnerships that can offer widespread access to
funding, and of their role in boosting innovation and research
in their local area.

in innovation and
their

2.14
The Committee of the Regions welcomes the fact that
several Member States within, for example, the Council and the
European Parliament have put forward the idea of incorpor-
ating ‘socially motivated research platforms’ (SMRP) as part of
the Seventh Framework Programme. SMRPs should be consid-
ered as a complement
to Technology Platforms which are
based on the premise that societal needs should act as a driving
force for determining long-term research strategies drawn up
by key players such as public authorities and research centres
(universities and institutes) but, where appropriate, by the busi-
ness sector as well. Europe needs new knowledge in order to
be able to better understand and address problems caused by

C 115/24

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

16.5.2006

challenges in the social sphere relating to, for example, intercul-
tural and ethnic differences, demographic factors and environ-
mental changes, including climate change. The aim of SMRPs is
to bring together European stakeholders to further knowledge
on major long-term social challenges facing Europe. Key stake-
holder groups include, of course, the ‘end-users’ of knowledge,
who are often local and regional authorities.

2.15
The concept of SMRPs springs in large part from the
initiatives of social stakeholders and their need for new knowl-
edge based on frontier research in various sectors of society. It
is also derives from the fact that these stakeholders take an
active part in identifying and framing the problems and issues
to be studied. Moreover, social stakeholders take active respon-
sibility for the dissemination and take-up of new knowledge,
which, of course, is more likely to happen when they them-
selves play a major role in formulating the problems. SMRPs
should therefore be seen as a complement
to TPs, where
industry is the driving force. Industrial players may be closely
involved in SMRPs, depending on the subject at hand, even
though other players are expected to be the main protagonists.
The concept of SMRPs includes inter-disciplinary research,
reflecting the complexity of human and social problems. Such
problems are best understood by examining them from several
different scientific perspectives. Extensive transnational coop-
eration to advance knowledge and expand the opportunities for
social innovation is an essential element of SMRPs.

Of the various subjects and themes mentioned in the
2.16
discussion on SMRPs, the Committee of the Regions would
single out here the following potential topics: the changing
demographic landscape in Europe (ageing population); Europe
and integration/migration; and sustainable development from
an environmental perspective.

All the Member States face the challenges of an ageing population,
with its implications for health care services, social services
(e.g. eHealth, healthy ageing, secure housing), pension schemes,
longer working lives, etc. Although this demographic challenge
is often portrayed as a problem, it also creates many opportu-
nities. An ageing population represents a vast knowledge
resource based on accumulated skills and experience and many
elderly people are also well-informed and demanding custo-
mers/consumers/patients, which calls for innovative solutions
to various issues. How can we best harness and develop a
person's resources over the course of his lifetime to the benefit
of the individual and society as a whole? The theme Integration/
migration could include, for example, questions relating to inte-
gration in the world of work, discrimination, etc. The theme
Sustainable development — the environment might cover,
for
example, spatial issues in Europe: the town as a driving force,
with an emphasis on the interaction between town and coun-
tryside; environmental pollution and its impact on the land-
scape, with an emphasis on the interaction between towns and
rural areas in the regions; Europe's responsibility for global
sustainable development, with an emphasis on the interaction
between the global and European contexts.

3. Ideas programme

3.1
It is crucial that the European Research Council possess
a high degree of integrity, under the direction of independent
and qualitative researchers. Its work must be characterised by
simple procedures for handling applications and a clear under-
standing as to who sets priorities.

Results from research funded via the European Research
3.2
Council under the Ideas programme should be systematically
disseminated in an appropriate way to researchers active in
other European regions. This funding should be provided under
the measures for promoting researchers' mobility or through
In the latter case, a smaller
direct support
proportion of the total funding for approved projects should be
earmarked for this purpose.

from the ERC.

4. People programme

4.1
In order for Europe to be able to recruit a sufficient
number of researchers it is important to make it easier for
women to work in research environments and here both policy
measures and changes in attitudes in the business sector and
the academic world could be important factors. The Marie
Curie Actions should be strengthened so as to stimulate the
interest of young people still in secondary education and to put
the focus on the role and place of women in science and
research with the aim of reducing the under-representation of
women.

The Committee would point out

4.2
that many other
measures are probably needed to enable Europe to attract
leading research groups. Real career development opportunities
in Europe are hindered by geographical,
legal, administrative
and cultural
factors. Possible initiatives for promoting the
further development of career opportunities include compari-
sons of career ladders, salaries and social benefits. Another way
might be to promote jobs which offer employees the opportu-
nity to combine research with their work.

research

Europe's

The Committee considers that ‘lifelong learning’ should
4.3
be seen as a resource for growth in Europe, i.e. a means of
achieving
objectives. The Committee
welcomes the fact that this point is taken up again in the
Commission proposal and believes that it is important that
players at regional as well as national and Community level are
involved in advancing work in this area. Here the Committee
would also draw attention to the Mutual Learning Platforms
initiative launched by DG Research, DG Enterprise and the
It is designed to help decision-
Committee of the Regions.
makers at regional level by developing specific tools for mutual
learning, such as regional foresight activities, regional bench-
marking and regional profiles.

16.5.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 115/25

4.4
The Committee believes that the Commission should
ensure that the development of researchers' careers at European
level covers all EU Member States as well as those parts of the
public sector which fall under the remit of local and regional
authorities.

4.5
The Committee would also emphasise that support is
needed for measures designed to promote the emergence of a
new generation of researchers who can work in universities,
industry
example, doctoral
programmes need to be developed which enable postgraduate
students to be involved in both industrial and public sector
activities during their study period. Research students must be
also trained and equipped to work outside the academic world.

and the public

sector.

For

5. Capacities programme

may be because the innovation sections have been removed
and transferred to a specific framework programme for compe-
titiveness and innovation, the CIP Programme. There are a
number of uncertainties concerning the interfaces and links
between these framework programmes, which the Commission
should clarify. It is not certain that problems will arise but if
they do the Commission will have to find a way of better coor-
dinating different programmes. A case in point is the question
it be
of venture capital for Joint Technology Initiatives: will
possible for a project to receive funding under the Seventh
Framework Programme during the commercialisation phase or
will funds have to be sought from the CIP Programme during
this phase?

5.5
Furthermore, it should be recognised that research insti-
tutes act as a natural bridge for technology transfers and colla-
borative product development. Depending on the economic
structure of a particular region, the need for specialisation can
be great. In addition to noting the synergies with cohesion
policy, the Commission should also underline the importance
of EU instruments for the implementation of both national and
regional innovation strategies.

the Regions welcomes this part of

the
The Committee of
Framework Programme. All of the six activities under this
programme are important but the Committee would particu-
larly highlight the following.

5.6
The Committee of the Regions agrees with the Commis-
sion that there is vast Research potential to be unlocked in the
EU's convergence regions, as defined in the context of the
Structural Funds.

5.1
The Regions of Knowledge initiative is highly commend-
able as, among other things, it highlights the regions' increased
significance for innovation and growth. The importance of the
knowledge-intensive regions for overall economic growth in
Europe cannot be overemphasised; they are the cornerstones of
countries' economies.

5.2
The Committee would like to see more links between
framework programmes and the Structural Funds. There is an
inherent tension between support for excellence and support
for cohesion. This tension can be alleviated by encouraging the
relevant parties in all the regions to work for excellence. The
Committee of the Regions has initiated a study on regions' and
local and regional authorities' structural capacity and motiva-
tion in respect of R&D, which addresses, inter alia, the connec-
tions between R&D, the Structural Funds and innovation issues.

5.3
The Committee of the Regions is aware of the debate
is,
under way in Europe on the Financial Perspectives.
however, of the utmost importance that this new initiative be
maintained, should the budget be cut in relation to the current
proposal. The proposed budget for this initiative is far too low
— only about EUR 160 million (approx. 2 %) of the total for
the Capacities programme (EUR 7.4 billion) — given the stated
objectives of the proposal.

It

is

5.7
Sectors which are less research intensive but make an
important contribution to European growth and the Lisbon
process must not be forgotten. The current 6th Framework
Programme
research-intensive
players. Providing financial support to less research-intensive
players in order to enable them to exploit existing technologies
would allow implementation of innovations that would other-
wise not be possible. Thus these players should be given a
more prominent position in the research programmes.

geared mainly

towards

5.8
The Committee welcomes the Science in Society action
programme and stresses that it is a key component of the new
Framework Programme.

6. The Committee of the Regions' recommendations

The Committee of the Regions

5.4
There is a lack of clear ambition as regards linking the
efforts of learning centres to developing and promoting the
commercialisation of R&D in collaboration with industry. This

believes that the social and ecological dimensions of
6.1
sustainable development should be become a more integral
part of all aspects of the Seventh Framework Programme for
Research and Development;

C 115/26

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

16.5.2006

6.2
expects the Commission to take a proactive role and
support the evolution of SMRPs in various ways along the lines
of the approach adopted towards Technology Platforms. For
example, in the initial phase, it could develop the concept of
SMRPs, encourage the various stakeholders to unite behind a
long-term vision and strategic research agenda, participate in
platforms as an observer in an advisory and supportive capacity
and ensure transparency and openness and the provision of
the Commission
relevant secretariat support.
would also help to increase the chances of successful imple-
mentation;

In so doing,

6.3
notes that representatives of the local and regional level
are working actively to bring together the relevant players to
develop the idea of SMRPs; would like to see the development
of a dialogue between the Commission, the Parliament, the
Council, national research funding agencies, local and regional
interested stakeholders,
and other
authorities,
primarily around the theme of ‘an ageing population’;

researchers

6.4
feels that the Commission must ensure that no adminis-
trative problems arise in implementation as a result of the fact
that the Framework Programme and the Competitiveness and
Innovation Programme (CIP) are run by different Directorates-
General and, further, that it must clarify the interfaces between
the two programmes;

Brussels, 16 November 2005.

6.5
stresses the importance of technological development
within the 7th Framework Programme and of creating close
synergies with the Framework Programme for Competitiveness
and Innovation (CIP), in order to generate new business and
jobs in knowledge-based enterprises throughout all European
regions;

considers that

there is a need to complement

6.6
the
thematic research priorities with broad issues relating to pubic
health, health care and social services. In addition, there is a
need for research on various aspects of urban development, not
just those related to environmental concerns;

considering the role of SMEs as motors of the European
6.7
economy, the CoR suggests that a balance between large initia-
tives and those for SMEs be sought in the 7th Framework
Programme, for instance by increasing financing for the Regions
of Knowledge initiative;

6.8
proposes that the Commission explore the possibility
of identifying good examples of scientific cooperation between
various stakeholders at local
level. This could also take the
form of a competition;

6.9
recommends that the Council and the Parliament adopt
the Commission's proposal to set the budget for the Seventh
Framework Programme at EUR 72 726 million.

The President

of the Committee of the Regions

Peter STRAUB