Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament: A strategic European framework for international science and technology cooperation COM(2008) 588 final
Date: 2009-06-11
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: ESC opinion, EU research policy, cooperation policy, innovation, investment, research and development, research body, research staff, scientific exchange








C_2009306EN.01001301.xml










16.12.2009   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 306/13





Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament: A strategic European framework for international science and technology cooperation

COM(2008) 588 final

(2009/C 306/03)
On 24 September 2008, the European Commission decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under Article 262 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the


‘Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament: A strategic European framework for international science and technology cooperation’


The Section for the Single Market, Production and Consumption, which was responsible for preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 19 May 2009. The rapporteur was Mr WOLF.
At its 454th plenary session, held on 10-11 June 2009 (meeting of 11 June), the European Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 111 votes to none, with one abstention:
1.   Summary and recommendations









1.1


International science cooperation has a broad — and invariably favourable — impact both on scientific and technical progress among the stakeholders involved, and also on understanding between nations. This is true not only within the European Research Area (ERA), but also right across the world.












1.2


Hence the Committee welcomes the Commission communication and endorses its basic objectives. Similarly, it welcomes and supports the relevant decisions (1) of the Competition Council of 2 December 2008, including the tone to set up a high-level group of experts (dedicated configuration of CREST).












1.3


The Committee backs the Commission in its bid to achieve a coordinated approach by the Member States to securing international framework agreements, and to incorporate in an appropriate way the thematic targets of international cooperation into the joint research programming and the preparatory work for the 8th Research Framework Programme.












1.4


At issue here are basic questions such as researcher mobility and intellectual property agreements, as well as moves to foster personal initiative and promote conferences as a conduit for knowledge-sharing and communication, and the need to boost the attractiveness of the ERA.












1.5


The Committee feels that, even with due regard for subsidiarity, the Commission has a key role to play in international agreements on major scientific and technical infrastructure projects, since the costs these entail (for building and operation) and the effort involved in using them are, generally speaking, beyond the wherewithal of individual Member States and are thus a typical task for the Community. The Committee therefore also endorses the objective of pursuing international research infrastructure projects (as has already been done with the ITER) or of involving international partners in European research infrastructure projects.












1.6


The Committee supports the Commission proposal to highlight ICT (information and communication technologies) as an issue for international cooperation, and at the same time recommends that the new category of ICT for Science and Research be introduced. However, the Committee would recommend that similar importance should also be attached to other key global questions such as energy, climate, the environment and health, though this should not mean ruling out other issues, particularly fundamental research, from international cooperation.












1.7


The Committee stresses that the success of international cooperation is very much dependent on the attractiveness of the European Research Area and on the performance of European universities and research institutes. The measures needed to achieve this are key elements of the Lisbon strategy. It is therefore all the more important, in the light of the current economic and financial crisis, to implement an anti-cyclical policy and to use all available financial and structural means to support the European Research Area and the foundations on which it is built, including its international dimension, and to make it attractive.




2.   Communication from the Commission









2.1


The communication presents a strategic European framework for international cooperation in science and technology (S&T). Its purpose is to:






—


strengthen the coordination of Member States' and EC actions aimed at reinforcing strategic S&T cooperation and information society dialogues with partners worldwide;










—


create additional synergies between public authorities, industry and civil society to make EU action in these policy fields more efficient;










—


facilitate access to knowledge, resources and markets worldwide;










—


have a positive influence on the global S&T agenda by pooling of resources;










—


improve framework conditions under which international research is conducted;










—


make it easier for Europe's researchers and universities to work with the best scientists and research infrastructures in the world;










—


strengthen the global position of the European industry in electronic communications and other advanced technologies.
















2.2


The Commission communication responds to the Council conclusions of February 2008, and is one of the five Commission initiatives on the future of the European Research Area (ERA). The proposed framework is designed to contribute to the free circulation of knowledge — ‘the EU's fifth freedom’ — at global level, to raising the S&T profile of Europe worldwide and to disseminating European ICT (Information and Communications Technology) know-how in the world.












2.3


Mobility of researchers is an essential feature here.












2.4


Cooperation with scientifically advanced partners will differ in nature from that with countries which are developing their science base; but both types of cooperation are needed.












2.5


Policy dialogues on S&T are to be launched with countries which signal an interest in becoming associated to the 7th framework programme for research and technological development (FP7).












2.6


By far the biggest share of publicly funded R&D investment comes from the Member States. Thus, the EU can effectively contribute to international cooperation across the world only by strengthening the partnership between the Member States and the European Community.




3.   The Committee's comments









3.1



Preliminary remarks. In its 2000 opinion (2) on the Communication from the Commission Towards a European research area, the Committee noted as a key hallmark of scientific research that ‘its methods and the related scientific terminology are the same in all countries and languages’, continuing: ‘Thus there is a single scientific “global culture” and a single scientific “technical language”, and associated common values. (…) Only this allows a global international exchange of knowledge and worldwide cooperation.’












3.2



Point of departure. It is encouraging to note that, for many decades now, a wide range of international (i.e. extra-EU) scientific and technical cooperation projects have been in place in many Member States — both between companies (global players) and between publicly supported research-performing organisations and their research groups. The various science and technology associations (3) also give a key fillip in this area, as do specific international organisations including the International Energy Agency (IEA) (4), the World Health Organisation (WHO), the International Union of Pure and Applied Physics (IUPAP), the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and also, among others, the European Space Agency (ESA) and the European Organisation for Nuclear Research (CERN). Overall experience to date has shown that those countries that openly exchange and cooperate in this area also reap cultural and economic benefits in the medium and long term.












3.3



Basic endorsement. The Committee thus endorses the basic objectives of the communication. Cooperation between countries across the world saves resources and disseminates new knowledge faster. Generally speaking, it has a broad — and invariably favourable — impact both on scientific and technical progress and also on understanding between nations. In this way, it also in particular helps build up good relations with the EU's neighbours. However, cooperation must not become an end in itself, as it requires additional expense that must in each case by justified by the expected added value.












3.4



Tension between competition and cooperation. The issue of international R&D cooperation under discussion here also touches on the tension between competition and cooperation (5). In basic research, competition is, in the main, considered only in terms of setting priorities for scientific findings and garnering the associated prestige. Competition issues take on growing economic importance, however, as R&D starts to produce marketable processes and products that bring economic benefits in their wake.












3.5



Promotion and recognition of personal initiative and mobility: The most important initiators and players in international cooperation are researchers themselves (scientists and engineers). It is thus vital to promote and recognise the importance of personal initiative and mobility. To that end, individual support is required, as is encouragement for mobility through measures similar to those in place — or still being aimed at — within the European Research Area.












3.6



Promotion of international conferences and science and technology associations. Specialist conferences are the main forum for publicising and evaluating findings, pooling knowledge and ideas, launching cooperation initiatives and developing new or improved concepts. Such conferences are generally organised by science and technology associations, which are typical civil society organisations. The Committee therefore recommends that there should be greater awareness and recognition of their value and that their efforts to disseminate knowledge, evaluate findings and coordinate research should be drawn on and encouraged (6).












3.7



Promotion and recognition of self-organisation: In addition to individual researchers, research institutes and universities are the prime movers in initiating and cultivating international cooperation — and in establishing the requisite contractual arrangements — with selected partner bodies, often on a number of different fronts within their own specific spheres of competence. That should be encouraged and supported, not least by putting in place reliable legal, financial and staffing parameters that also offer a sufficient degree of continuity.












3.8



Additional support: In order to facilitate or initiate the action outlined above, government-level framework agreements between Member States and non-European third countries are helpful, if not essential. The Committee feels that this is the key coordinating task, i.e. to ensure that there is policy coherence in international R&D cooperation (research policy, but also neighbourhood policy, development policy, industrial and economic policy) — using both European and national instruments — towards third countries.












3.9



Role of the European Commission: While, on the one hand, the Committee would stress that research bodies and businesses must act under their own responsibility to initiate and flesh out those aspects of international cooperation — and the attendant programmes — that may be useful to them, it does on the other hand feel that the Community and the Member States have important tasks to perform on basic, overarching questions such as the following, which should be discussed in a spirit of partnership between the European Commission and the Member States:






—


Basic mobility issues such as visa matters, tax issues, personal legal protection, insurance, pension rights etc., whereby the primary aim should be to safeguard the interests of European research and European researchers and also to secure two-way arrangements with international partners.










—


The possible association of other, non-EU (and especially neighbouring) countries in FP7, including two-way access agreements.










—


Basic issues in international agreements on the protection on intellectual property (7) in research and development (8). This again highlights Europe's weakness: the absence of a Community patent and of any grace period.










—


Support for cooperation by working groups from third countries on projects supported under the RTD framework programme, and equivalent arrangements for EU working groups to cooperate on projects supported by the third countries concerned. The access rules must be adapted accordingly.










—


Efforts under the initiative for joint programming in research to ensure that the Member States make sufficient resources available for international cooperation.










—


Coordination of these objectives with the preparatory and drafting work for the 8th Research Framework Programme. Strengthening international cooperation by further expanding existing measures and, where appropriate, preparing new ones.
















3.10



Key message of the Commission communication: Accordingly, the Committee feels that the Commission communication's key message is to bring the ever-growing importance of international cooperation to the attention of the Council and the Parliament, to put in place a coordinated approach by the Member States and the Community to securing international framework agreements, and to explore the thematic and regional targets of international cooperation and take appropriate account of these in the joint research programming and the preparatory work for the 8th RTD Framework Programme.












3.11



European Research Infrastructure. The Committee feels that, even with due regard for subsidiarity, the Commission should play a stronger, direct role in international cooperation on large apparatus and other projects that fall under the heading of European research infrastructure, since the costs these entail (for building and operation) and the effort involved in using them are, generally speaking, beyond the wherewithal of individual Member States. This applies in particular to those programmes supported and coordinated by the Commission in which the EU is a direct partner (e.g. the ITER fusion programme) or plays a key coordinating role, for instance the European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (9) (ESFRI) and the additional measures taken under it. The Committee is thus particularly supportive of the Commission's objective of ‘tackling scientific challenges through global research infrastructures’. This may also involve the participation of international partners in European research infrastructure projects. The geographical aspect and the available scientific potential should also be taken into consideration in this context.












3.12



Strategic Forum for International S&T Cooperation — Crest Group: The Committee welcomes and supports the setting up of a Strategic Forum (dedicated configuration of CREST) in accordance with the preliminary recommendation of the Competitiveness Council of 14 November 2008 and its corresponding decision of 2 December 2008. (10) It also welcomes and supports the corresponding aims, i.e.:






—


a long-term partnership between the European Commission and the Member States for improved coordination of aims, instruments and activities of international cooperation in science and technology. This also includes greater international cooperation under the RTD framework programme;










—


further development of the international dimension of the European Research Area;










—


Coordination of activities and positions vis-à-vis third countries so as to speak with a single European voice in international fora.
















3.13



International dimension of the European Research Area: The Committee wishes to place special emphasis on the international dimension of the European Research Area. This involves both greater cooperation between the Member States (11) on the basis of ‘variable geometry’ (12) and the coordination of R&D activities at international level.












3.14



Convergence of humanities and natural sciences: The Committee recommends that international cooperation be expanded beyond the area of science and technology into areas where these have discernable links to the humanities and the related ethical issues.












3.15



Shortcomings in the communication: The Committee regrets, however, that the communication does not draw sufficient attention to the many existing instances of cooperation and to the agreements in place (see point 3.2) or to the initiators or tools involved, thus giving the uninformed reader an overly negative picture of the current situation. Moreover, past experience gained in this way should be the basis for any further moves forward. Better use should also be made of initiatives such as those of the specialised associations.




4.   Specific comments

4.1   Choice of topics: some observations









4.1.1



ICT including ‘ICT for science and research’: Among the areas of key importance for international cooperation, the Commission draws particular attention to ICT as a key cross-cutting technology for science and industry, including the goal of disseminating European ICT know-how in the world. The Committee fully supports this, but would nonetheless point out that, as an issue, ICT must not be interpreted too narrowly, but should encompass the entire area of activity — from the harmonisation of differing standards to communication networks and high-performance computers and their increasingly sophisticated software. The wide-ranging discipline of scientific computing (13) has now developed into a very significant additional pillar of scientific and technological method. This might be achieved best by introducing a sub-category ‘ICT for science and research’. The Committee also notes the significant potential benefits of cooperation with groups of experts in international partner countries.












4.1.2



Energy, climate, environment and health. However, there are other equally important global issues — including the energy and climate question and research in the fields of environment and health — that should also have an appropriate profile in the proposed strategy.












4.1.3



Remaining open to other issues: It is true that, at certain times, particular questions and issues do take on special importance and urgency — as is currently the case for energy and climate questions, for instance — and that there is also a need to pool scare resources. However, given the unpredictable nature of new findings, and of the timeframes involved in transforming those findings into technical applications, the Committee recommends that the range of issues to be addressed in international framework agreements should not be limited from the outset but should remain open to other thorny questions that may arise and take on new currency in the future. International cooperation is, moreover, also a particularly important element of pure research.












4.1.4



Pure research (or basic research): The Committee recalls the contribution of pure research to the discovery of the laws of nature on the basis of which almost all modern technologies were developed and medical discoveries were made. The Committee recommends that the advice of the European Research Council (ERC) be sought regarding implementation.












4.2



European self-interest and differing categories: It is in Europe's own interest to make a clearer distinction between different categories of international cooperation, i.e.:






—


Association arrangements with the EU RTD framework programme. In addition to countries such as Norway and Switzerland — EU neighbours already associated with the RTD framework programme — the Committee particularly supports moves to open association negotiations with countries such as Russia and (14) Ukraine.










—


Cooperation with highly developed non-neighbouring countries, i.e. countries with top-class training facilities and a highly developed R&D infrastructure, such as the USA, Japan and, increasingly, China, Brazil and India. This is a particularly important aspect of the issue.










—


Cooperation with other countries where the key goal is, in the first instance, to realise, promote and draw mutual benefit from their potential capabilities.
















4.3



The language question — a problem, but not a taboo. The international language of science is English. Thus those EU countries where English is the native language or is mastered by most R&D stakeholders have a natural advantage in terms of attracting students — as future decision-makers in scientific cooperation — and of engaging in scientific exchanges. The other Member States should also seek appropriate solutions that are of benefit both to themselves and to the European Research Area.












4.4



Mobility and avoiding brain drain. The mobility of scientists, i.e. researchers, teaching staff and students, is vital to knowledge-sharing and cooperation and is, nowadays, also a virtual prerequisite for anyone wishing to take a research career further. However, in the long run, mobility can also mean that a country's best talents move to wherever they find the best and most attractive research environment and opportunities for their own personal development. This is a problem both for the EU as a whole — in relation to its neighbours and to the USA for instance — but also between individual EU Member States.












4.5



Providing opportunities. Since it is simply not an option to prevent mobility and thus deprive talented young people of opportunities for development, it is vital for the EU that all the Member States — and indeed the Community itself — should, as part of their research policy, work to develop centres of excellence and/or other attractive models, and thus to strike an appropriate overall balance in the desired mobility flow (brain circulation). Resources from the Structural Funds should be used for this purpose.












4.6



Making Europe more attractive — the European Research Area: The same is also true of the relationship between the EU as a whole and its international partners. A crucial factor in the success of international cooperation and in the EU's negotiating position on the various agreements is the attractiveness of EU research and development, including training facilities/university infrastructure, and the individual career opportunities of its researchers. Strengthening the European Research Area is thus one of the most effective means of avoiding a brain drain out of the EU, attracting the world's best scientists to Europe and being able to negotiate international agreements from a position of strength.












4.7



Lisbon strategy, current crisis and anti-cyclical policy: The success of international cooperation is thus very much dependent on the attractiveness of the European Research Area and from the performance of European universities and research institutes. The measures needed to achieve this are key elements of the Lisbon strategy. It is therefore all the more important, in the light of the current economic and financial crisis, to implement an anti-cyclical policy and to use all available financial and structural means to support the European Research Area and its foundations, including its international dimension, and to make it attractive. At the same time, the Committee calls on the Commission and the Member States to adopt an anti-cyclical staffing policy in order to counteract the threat of unemployment for young graduates that may arise from a reduction in R&D activities in the private sector. (15)






Brussels, 11 June 2009.

The President
of the European Economic and Social Committee
Mario SEPI




(1)  2910th COMPETITIVENESS Council meeting Brussels, 2 December 2008. Conclusions concerning a European partnership for international scientific and technological cooperation.

(2)  OJ C 204/5.70, 18.7.2000.

(3)  Academic associations organised by academic discipline at national, European or indeed international level are financed largely by membership fees from their members and are thus typical representatives of organised civil society.

(4)  Known as Implementing Agreements.

(5)  OJ C 218, 11.9.2009, p. 8.

(6)  Point 3.10.1 (alt'd), EESC opinion published in OJ C 44, 16.2.2008, p. 1.

(7)  This is not, however, meant to limit room for manoeuvre in such agreements, where, among other things, account has to be taken of the balance, or otherwise, of partners' existing knowledge and skills.

(8)  OJ C 218, 11.9.2009, p. 8.

(9)  OJ C 182, 4.8.2009, p. 40.

(10)  2891st COMPETITIVENESS Council meeting Brussels, 2 December 2008. Conclusions concerning a European partnership for international scientific and technological cooperation.

(11)  OJ C 182, 4.8.2009, p. 40.

(12)  In this context, the concept of variable geometry describes the possibility of cooperation and/or involvement of individual Member States that takes different forms in each case (see Article 169 of the Consolidated Treaties).

(13)  Often called simulation science of numerical modelling. This method makes it possible to investigate complex questions in a way that was impossible in the past.

(14)  This is a recommendation of the EESC that goes beyond the Commission proposal.

(15)  See CESE 864/2009, point 1.7 (not yet published in the Official Journal).