Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the European Institute of Technology
Date: 2007-02-13
Institutions: European Committee of the Regions
Subjects: EU financing, EU office or agency, EU research policy, chamber of commerce and industry, higher education, recognition of diplomas, research and development, research body, teaching quality, technology park

30.6.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 146/27

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the European Institute of Technology

(2007/C 146/04)

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

— suggests that the EIT governance structures are developed to balance the need for independence for
the EIT for its day to day running, with the need for Member States and the EU Institutions to have
the ability to safeguard the interests of the EU, for example through a quinquennial review by a
Member State panel;

— regrets that the proposal puts forward inadequate fresh funding for the research community. It insists
that the existing EU funding streams for research are not top sliced but instead additional private
sector contributions are specified and ensured by clear mechanisms. The Knowledge and Innovation
Communities (KIC) should be encouraged to become financially sustainable over time and also have
their budget regularly reviewed against their performance;

— recommends that in its initial stages, the EIT does not award its own degrees, rather develops a brand

or label that is awarded by KIC partner universities;

— recommends that the selection of KIC partnerships should take account of both their excellence and
also demonstrated potential for excellence in education, research and innovation. It calls on the Euro-
pean Commission to specify how these criteria will be measured;

— recommends to instruct the EIT to give a high rating to KIC applications that have strong partnerships
with structured research communities and engagement with their regional and local authorities/
bodies. SMEs should explicitly be listed as potential partner organisations.

C 146/28

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

30.6.2007

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS,

Having regard to the Communication from the Commission to the European Council on The European Insti-
tute of Technology: further steps towards its creation, (COM(2006) 276 final);

Having regard to the Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and the Council establishing the Euro-
pean Institute of Technology (COM(2006) 604 final — 2006/0197 (COD));

Having regard to the decision of the European Commission of 8 June 2006 to consult it on the subject,
under the first paragraph of Article 265 of the Treaty establishing the European Community;

Having regard to the decision of the Bureau of 25 April 2006 to instruct its Commission for Culture,
Education and Research to draw up an opinion on this subject;

Having regard to the Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament:
Delivering on the modernisation agenda for universities: Education, Research and Innovation, (COM(2006) 208 final);

Having regard to its Opinion 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), (COM(2005) 119 final — 2005/0043 (COD) — 2005/0044 (CNS)),
(CdR 155/2005 fin) (1);

Having regard to its Opinion on the Proposal for a Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council estab-
lishing a Competitiveness and Innovation Framework Programme (2007-2013),
(COM(2005) 121 final —
2005/0050 (COD)), (CdR 150/2005 fin) (2);

Having regard to its Opinion on the Communication from the Commission: Mobilising the brainpower of Europe:
(COM(2005) 152 final),
enabling universities
(CdR 154/2005 fin) (3);

contribution to the Lisbon Strategy,

to make

their

full

Having regard to the Communication from the Commission to the European Council: Implementing the
renewed partnership for growth and jobs Developing a knowledge flagship: the European Institute of Technology,
(COM(2006) 77 final);

Having regard to the Communication from the Commission 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 Presidency Conclusions of the Brussels European Councils on 23/24 March and on
15/16 June 2006 on the European Institute for Technology;

Having regard to the draft opinion adopted by the Commission for Culture, Education and Research on
28 September 2006 (CdR 273/2006 rev. 2), (Rapporteur: Mr Keith Walters, Member of Cambridgeshire
County Council (UK/EPP));

Whereas:

1.

2.

3.

4.

Positive steps forward have been taken with the Commission's second Communication and the
proposal for a regulation on the subject of the creation of a European Institute of Technology;

Although it is not possible that all research institutes in the EU will participate directly in the EIT, the
aspiration of all to become part of it through a Knowledge and Innovation Community will change
the research environment for the better through the strengthening of the knowledge triangle of
education, research and innovation;

The improvement of the knowledge triangle, and in particular the development of strong partnerships
between business and research, will make a significant contribution to the improvement of the EU's
competitiveness;

Balanced regional development can be enhanced if the EIT's Knowledge and Innovation Communities,
which will centre around the best teams working with businesses, work together in synergy with
regional and local economic development bodies;

adopted the following opinion at its 68th plenary session, held on 13-14 February 2007 (meeting of
13 February):

(1) OJ C 115, 16.5.2006, p. 17.
(2) OJ C 115, 16.5.2006, p. 20.
(3) OJ C 81, 4.4.2006, p. 16.

30.6.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 146/29

1. General views

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

reminds the Commission of

1.10
the important role of
local and regional authorities, particularly their economic part-
nerships, in setting down the conditions for interaction between
the knowledge triangle, such as stimulating
the 3 parts of
cluster development, providing the infrastructure for incubators,
stimulating investment from industry, etc;

1.1 welcomes this second Communication as a positive
contribution to the debate on the establishment of a European
Institute of Technology (EIT) and as a contribution to delivering
Lisbon;

1.2 welcomes the balanced approach taken by the Commis-
sion in the preparation of the legislative proposal including the
change of title for ‘Knowledge Communities’ to ‘Knowledge and
Innovation Communities’ (KIC) and it is pleased to note that
local and regional authorities are included as potential KIC
‘partner organisations’, but has concerns with some of
the
detail;

1.11
further reminds the Commission that regional and
local authorities are best placed to encourage SMEs to work
within
promote
industry-university partnerships which are likely to thrive in the
regional/local environment
taking into account existing and
future circumstances, policies, push and pull factors, etc;

partnership

research

also

and

to

a

1.12
the EIT
further emphasises that the main focus of
should be on innovation, knowledge transfer and applied
research projects.

1.3
supports the initiative which is designed to strengthen
the relations between the three pillars of the knowledge triangle
— education, research and innovation — and the proposal to
address the recognised innovation gap in Europe;

2. General recommendations

1.4
re-states the view that successful research and innova-
tion models cannot be copied at will and instead the EU should
look at building upon successful models of best practice of
strong relations between research, innovation and education in
the EU;

recognises the importance of the EIT bringing on board
top
the key stakeholders in the knowledge triangle,
industry and public authorities. A two tier

1.5
all of
research teams,
system should be avoided at all costs;

acknowledges that some issues surrounding elements of

1.6
the proposal still remain problematic;

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

recommends that the EIT combines the strengths of
2.1
both the EU's globally recognised excellent universities and their
research teams and bodies, as well as the best teams from other
universities and research bodies across the EU with potential to
be excellent;

2.2
therefore urges the Commission to work with the
universities and research bodies that have had a strong experi-
ence of the knowledge triangle in action. If the EIT fails to
engage with Europe's top ranking universities and research
bodies, then this will impact upon how it is viewed globally;

1.7
regrets that the new legislative proposal puts forward
inadequate fresh funding for the research community and that
the proposal does not contain clear mechanisms for ensuring
private sector financing;

2.3
insists that the creation of the Knowledge and Innova-
tion Communities be a bottom up approach, initially selecting
existing excellent examples of research/business collaboration;

insists that the existing funding streams for research
1.8
(FP& CIP) are not top sliced but instead additional private sector
contributions are specified;

underlines that

1.9
local and regional
authorities on the conditions that create interaction which leads
to innovation is crucial;

the influence of

2.4
is pleased to note that the selection process for Knowl-
edge and Innovation Communities be open, allowing research
teams with potential to aspire to the EIT. All universities and
research bodies, both large and small, should feel that if the
right structures, partnerships and policies are put in place that
their best teams could eventually actively participate in the EIT.
However, it regrets that the related key-criterion of ‘excellence
in education and research’ does not refer specifically to potential
excellence too and calls on the Commission to specify how the
two criteria will be measured;

C 146/30

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

30.6.2007

2.5
suggests that a way to reinforce the relationship between
the research and private sector in a Knowledge and Innovation
Communities could be to encourage/incentivise the KICs to
become financially sustainable over time and calls for the legis-
lative proposal to include this approach within its provisions;

‘marketable’ solutions to problems faced by SMEs, businesses
and industry;

opposes the Commission's proposal

2.6
the EIT to
award its own degrees and recommends on the subject of
degrees that in its initial stages,
issue its own
degrees, rather that the EIT develop a brand or label that is
awarded by a KIC partner university. Otherwise an EIT degree
risks alienating leading universities;

the EIT not

for

2.13
urges the Commission to avoid any dilution of the
focus on the establishment of the European Research Council as
the prime driver of fundamental research as a result of the
strong and positive momentum behind the establishment of the
EIT. As much as possible the governing board of the EIT should
establish strong links with the ERC and establish structures to
ensure complementarities and avoid silo working and duplica-
tion;

suggests that in the initial years of the EIT it should
2.7
restrict
to branding a masters programme containing
specific elements such as industry placements, interdisciplinarity,
entrepreneurship training, etc;

itself

suggests that

the EIT Knowledge and Innovation
2.14
Communities be set up gradually,
learning from each experi-
ence, and adapting the structures as appropriate each time new
KICs are formed, and is pleased that the Commission proposes a
scenario of 6 KICs by 2013;

2.8
insists on appropriate private-sector representation on
the governing board, which rightly should have the autonomy
to set the EIT's strategic agenda;

2.15
considers the following areas to be of key importance
for establishing and managing of the Knowledge and Innovation
Communities:

2.9
suggests that the EIT governance structures are devel-
oped to balance the need for independence for the EIT for its
day to day running, with the need for Member States and the
EU Institutions to have the ability to safeguard the interests of
the EU,
review by a
Member State panel;

for example through a quinquennial

calls on the Commission, when selecting KICs,

2.10
to
instruct the governing board in its guidelines to give a high
rating to KIC applications from partnerships which involve
regional or
local authorities and have structured research
communities involving scientific and technological cooperation
research bodies and companies with
between universities,
medium- and long-term research planning;

reminds

the Commission of

2.11
cluster
forming role which regions and local authorities play through
their policies and investment into the infrastructure, that leads
to strong university-industry collaboration;

the decisive

— review procedures

and performance measurement:

it
welcomes the reference made by the legislative proposal to
result-oriented parameters, however it regrets that these are
not adequately specified;

— financing arrangements/sustainability of

it
rejects the Commission's proposal for the largest part of
funding of the KICs to be derived from existing Community
programmes and funds,
in particular potential top slicing
from EU research funds;

the funding:

— links to research supported by the ERC;

— role of

regional/local

authorities/bodies:

regional/local

engagement in KIC bids should be given strong emphasis;

— role of SMEs: it recommends SMEs to be explicitly listed as
potential
legislative
‘partner organisations’ within the
proposal and requests the Commission to specify how to
engage SMEs in Knowledge and Innovation Communities;

suggests that as a means of judging the success of the
2.12
EIT, the governing board be set targets by which its strategic
direction be measured. Measurements of success could include
indicators that evaluate the EIT's ability to offer concrete

recommends that the staffing question be dealt with in
2.16
a flexible way to ensure the engagement of the best teams of
researchers in the EIT. Dual affiliation is felt to be a positive step
forward in the question of staffing;

30.6.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 146/31

2.17
suggests that as a means of engaging top ranking teams of researchers and establishing a sense of
commitment to the EIT, the KICs employ staff for a set percentage of their time. Maximum and minimum
levels can be set on a case by case basis and adapted over the course of a KIC's duration;

2.18
urges the Commission in the preparation of its legislative proposal on the EIT to emphasise the
important role of local and regional bodies which will provide essential support for KICs in particular and
bridging the gaps in the knowledge triangle in general.

3. The Committee of the Regions' recommendations on the proposal for a regulation

Recommendation 1

Recital (10)

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR Amendment

There is a need to support education as an integral but
often missing component of a comprehensive innovation
strategy. The agreement between the EIT and KICs should
provide that the degrees and diplomas awarded through the
KICs should be EIT degrees and diplomas. The EIT should
promote the recognition of EIT degrees and diplomas in
the Member States. All these activities should be carried
out without prejudice to Directive 2005/36/EC on the
recognition of professional qualifications.

There is a need to support education as an integral but
often missing component of a comprehensive innovation
strategy. The agreement between the EIT and KICs should
provide that the degrees and diplomas awarded through the
KICs should be EIT branded degrees and diplomas. The EIT
should promote the recognition of EIT branded degrees and
diplomas in the Member States. All these activities should
be carried out without prejudice to Directive 2005/36/EC
on the recognition of professional qualifications.

This recommendation implies that 'EIT degrees' should be changed to ‘EIT branded degrees’ throughout the
proposal.

Reason

In the explanatory memorandum of the Proposal for a Regulation, the Commission specifically refers to an
EIT ‘brand’ on degrees which promote entrepreneurial elements etc. This is reasonable, but to many leading
universities, an EIT degree is not necessary for the EIT to achieve its aims. A degree incorporating such
elements awarded by one or more KIC partner university with an EIT ‘brand’ will achieve the same aim.

Recommendation 2

Article 5 (2) (a)

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR Amendment

2.
A partnership will be selected by the EIT to become a
KIC on the basis of a competitive, open and transparent
process, including the publication of detailed specifications
and conditions.

2.
A partnership will be selected by the EIT to become a
KIC on the basis of a competitive, open and transparent
process, including the publication of detailed specifications
and conditions.

The selection of partnerships shall take particular account
of:

The selection of partnerships shall take particular account
of:

(a) the current and potential innovation capacity within the
partnership as well as its excellence in education and
research;

(a) the current and potential innovation capacity within the
partnership as well as its excellence and demonstrated
potential for excellence in education and research;

C 146/32

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

30.6.2007

Reason

In line with point 2.4 of the opinion.

Recommendation 3

Article 5 (2)

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR Amendment

A partnership will be selected by the EIT to become a KIC
on the basis of a competitive, open and transparent
process, including the publication of detailed specifications
and conditions.

A partnership will be selected by the EIT to become a KIC
on the basis of a competitive, open and transparent
process, including the publication of detailed specifications
and conditions.

(...)

(...)

The selection shall also take account of:

The selection shall also take account of:

a) an operational structure demonstrating commitment to

a) an operational structure demonstrating commitment to

the EIT and its goals;

the EIT and its goals;

b) the capacity to ensure a dynamic, flexible and attractive
working environment which rewards both individual
and team achievements in terms of innovation, research
and education;

b) the capacity to ensure a dynamic, flexible and attractive
working environment which rewards both individual
and team achievements in terms of innovation, research
and education;

c) the basis on which the degrees and diplomas would be
awarded including the arrangements to take in account
the Community policy on the European Higher Educa-
tion Area, particularly in terms of compatibility, trans-
parency,
and
diplomas;

recognition and quality of degrees

c) the basis on which the degrees and diplomas would be
awarded including the arrangements to take in account
the Community policy on the European Higher Educa-
tion Area, particularly in terms of compatibility, trans-
parency,
and
diplomas;

recognition and quality of degrees

d) the capacity of

the partnership to adapt and take
account of changes in their field or in the innovation
landscape.

d) the capacity of

the partnership to adapt and take
account of changes in their field or in the innovation
landscape.

e) The strength of the partnership including its engage-
ment with its regional and local authorities and bodies.

Reason

This recommendation takes forward point 2.10 of the opinion which insists that applications to become
KICs should indicate engagement with local and regional authorities.

Recommendation 4

Article 15

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR Amendment

The EIT shall ensure that its activities, including those
1.
managed through KICs, shall be subject
to continuous
monitoring and periodic independent evaluation, to ensure
both the highest quality of outcome and the most efficient
use of resources. The outcomes of the evaluation shall be
made public.

The EIT shall ensure that its activities, including those
1.
managed through KICs, shall be subject
to continuous
monitoring and periodic independent evaluation, to ensure
both the highest quality of outcome and the most efficient
use of resources. The outcomes of the evaluation shall be
made public.

2. Within five years from the date of adoption of this
Regulation and every four years thereafter, the Commission
shall make public an evaluation of the EIT. This shall be
based on an independent external evaluation, and shall
examine how the EIT fulfils its mission. It shall cover all
activities of the EIT and the KICs and shall examine the
effectiveness, sustainability, efficiency and relevance of the
activities pursued and their relation with Community poli-
cies. It shall take into account the views of stakeholders, at
both European and national level.

2. Within five years from the date of adoption of this
Regulation and every four years thereafter, the Commission
shall make public an evaluation of the EIT. This shall be
based on an independent external evaluation, and shall
examine how the EIT fulfils its mission. It shall cover all
activities of the EIT and the KICs and shall examine the
effectiveness, sustainability, efficiency and relevance of the
activities pursued and their relation with Community poli-
cies. It shall take into account the views of stakeholders, at
both European and national level.

(…)

30.6.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 146/33

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR Amendment

Brussels, 13 February 2007.

3.
KICs should have their budget regularly reviewed
against their performance. As a general rule KICs funding
should decrease gradually over the lifetime of the project
and should be replaced by other funding. Ability to attract
external
investment into KICs will be a key measure of
success for the EIT.

(…)

The President

of the Committee of the Regions

Michel DELEBARRE