Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

LuLL88 Official ]onrnalof the EuropeanCommumties l ^ o C ^ 1 8 ^

Opinion onadraft Council Decision uponaEuropean Stimulation Plan for economic science

1989199^ SPES

^88^C^18^1^

O n ^ A p n l 1988 the Council of the European Communities decided to consult the Economic
and Social Committee, under A r t i c l e ! ^ C^^ of the Treaty establishing the European
Economic Community on the abo^ementioned draft Council Decision.

The section for energy, nulcear questions and research, which was responsible for preparing
the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its Opinion on 9 September 1988. The
rapporteur was ^virVelascoAiancebo.

At its ^ 8 t h plenary session ^meeting of ^8 September 1988^ the Economic and Social
Committee adopted the following Opinion unanimously.

The Committee approves the Commission proposal
and inparticular the objectives of theprogramme. It
considers, however, that an assessment of the needs of
economic science in Europe is essential so as to a^oid
[duplication andawasteoffunds.lt is also particularly](http://andawasteoffunds.lt)
important that the ^iews of the relevant economic,
social and academic groups be taken into account when
the topics of research are selected.

1. Introduction

1.1, In its Opinion of l ^ D e c e m b e r ! 9 8 ^ ^ o n the
Commission SCIENCE plan proposals, the Com
mitteeendorsed the idea of a similar measure in the

field of economic science, with the same objectives,
i.e. increasing mobility and cooperation within the
research community in Europe in order to increase their
professional performance'.

1.^. Eor the purposes of this programmegeconomic
science' must be understood to mean not only the
fundamentalpnnciplesofeconomicsasascience,but
also its practical applications in society,such as business
economics, social economics, economicpolicy perse,
etc. This is certainly how the Commission understands
it too.

1.^. The Committee reaffirms its support for the
Commission'simtiati^e in proposing the present SPES
Programme and approves its objectives.

IBP The Committee notes, however, that the funds
made available for the implementation of the frame
work programme of community activities in the field of
research and technological development ^198^1991^^
arenotsufficientatpresent forthede^elopmentof a
similar programme for all human and sociaMsciences.

^ o i ^ e ^, ^ ^ t ^ ^ ^ 3

1.^. The Commission, which isawareofthissitu
ation, should provide the funds necessary to launch
such a programme when it carries out its planned
revision of the framework programme.

^. Ceneral comments

^.1. Lhe Committee only partly shares the Com
mission's^iew that its proposal is justified by the^rela
timely weak performanceof economic science'm Europe
which is ^wellbelowwhat might be expected'.Although
the United States was the world'sleading producer of
economic technology foralong time, this is no longer
the case^ the reasons for this include the relative failure

of the theoretical models developed in the United States
and the difficulties they ha^e encountered in resolving
the problems of their own economy ^budget and trade
deficits, industrial producti^ity,controllmg the money
supply, foreign debtP

^ . ^hile acknowledging the important contn
butions of economic science as developed in the United
States, Europe has nevertheless become aware of the
need to develop its own theoretical and practical models
whichtakeaccountof its ownparticular social,econ
omic and cultural identity.

^ . In doing this,Europe'saim is not to produce an
economic technology to compete with the United States,
but to demise and put into practice the means for conD
structing a macro and microeconomic technology
which is geared to the needs of both European govern
ments and firms and which, more generally, meets the
needs of European society asawhole.

^BP In particular these needs are linked to the de^el
opment by the Community of concepts cohered by such
terms as internal market, harmonization, economic and
social integration, integrated programmes, critical
masses, socialcosts, mimmumthresholds,etc., which

No C 318/24 Official Journal of the European Communities 12. 12. 88

help to identify problems which cannot be solved properly by existing economic technology. Not until Europe
has evolved such a technology will economic debate be
able to play its full role in Community research.

2.5. Bearing this objective in mind, the aims of the
proposed programme would seem decidedly limited.
Nevertheless, the Committee endorses the programme
which should eventually help to boost Europe's economic science potential by improving collaboration
between the responsible bodies.

2.6. The Committee recognizes the merits of the
measures which the Commission is proposing to introduce and considers that this pilot phase of the programme should also provide an opportunity to:

2.6.1. Take stock of the resources available in the

field of economic research in the Community. There is
a lack of knowledge about the main specialists and
research centres when the Community is. viewed as a
whole (transport economics in the University of Leeds,
sociology of labour and industrial economics in various
Italian and English universities, regional economics at
Valencia, etc.). The most immediate effects would be
to avoid duplication, to draw on the experience of
others and to give a boost to future cooperation.

2.6.2. Encourage a Community-wide debate (universities, business, trade unions and consumers) on the
main social and economic problems in the Community;
this should help to determine the most relevant lines
of research and which subjects should be studied at
secondary and university level in all Member States. In
short, make a start on the groundwork for the creation
of a European economic technology.

2.7. One of the reasons for the relatively weak performance of economic science is the occasional inad
equacy of the statistics available at European level. The
Committee would ask the Commission to reflect on

this and to come up with proposals as to how the
Statistical Office of the European Communities could
help to alleviate these shortcomings and thus become
a reference point for all European economic science
researchers.

2.8. To achieve this it is vital to construct a statistical

data bank on economic activities using criteria which
can be applied and assessed uniformly in all the EC
countries [components of gross domestic product
(GDP), evaluation of the performance of foreign econ

omies, social balance-sheet, consumer price index, statistics on the employment of the active population, etc.].

2.9. It should be remembered that the choice of what

is included in the data and of how this information is

presented implies a socio-economic assessment of what
most needs to be known. It is essential that the defi
nition of 'what it is desirable to know' be discussed as

part of the work referred to in point 2.6.2.

3. Specific comments

3.1. _Budget_

3.1.1. The Committee realizes that at this stage the
programme is experimental, which may explain the
modest level of funding allocated by the Commission.
The Committee would once again warn the Commission that the funds could be wasted by being spread
too thinly over a large number of stimulation measures
and research projects.

3.1.2. Consequently the Commission is urged, in this
experimental phase, to concentrate its efforts on providing opportunities for debate at European level (seminars, conferences, associations of specialists in various
fields, in cooperation with universities and relevant
economic and social interest groups) and on the establishment of joint research networks by economic science
researchers of the Member States.

3.2. _Criteria for selecting applications_ _for_ _financial_

_support_

3.2.1. The Committee approves the criteria which
the Commission intends to apply for selecting applications for financial support (scientific excellence, multinational European aspect, European interest of the
substance of the research).

3.2.2. It also supports the Commission's concern to
give priority to those research topics which deal with
specific social and economic problems in the Community and the development of Community policies
(internal market, economic and social integration, coordination of economic policies, tax harmonization, etc.)
rather than pure economic theory.

3.3. _Composition_ _and role of the Committee_ _for the_
_European development_ _of science and_ _technology_
_(Codest)_

3.3.1. Article 4 of the draft Decision states that the

Commission shall be assisted in the execution of the

programme by Codest, in particular for the selection

12. 12. 88 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 318/25

of the measures, projects and researchers to receive
financial support.

3.3.2. The Committee doubts whether the composition of Codest is suited to this task. Nor does the
wording of Article 4 seem to reflect the Commission's
real intentions, namely to set up within Codest an ad
hoc committee comprising an as yet unspecified number
of highly qualified economists in addition to three members of Codest.

3.3.3. These intentions should be clear from the
actual wording of the draft Decision, which the Committee could then approve, provided that the members
of this committee were also representative not only of
academic circles, but also of the socio-economic interest

groups.

3.3.4. This committee should also submit an annual
report containing a list of applications for financial
support and of the stimulation measures projects and/
or researchers receiving support. The report must be
published.

Done at Brussels, 28 September 1988.

3.4. _Forwarding of the report reviewing the results_
_of the programme to the Economic and Social_
_Committee_

3.4.1. Article 5 of the draft Decision states that the
Commission shall draw up a report reviewing the
results of the programme and forward it to the Council
and the European Parliament. Once again the Commission omits all reference to its forwarding to the
Economic and Social Committee.

3.4.2. The Committee can only repeat its demand
that express provision be made for it to receive the
research programme reviews. Both for the Committee
and the Council and the European Parliament these
reports are particularly important in assessing the programmes launched by the Commission and in deciding
not only whether its proposals for modification or
prolongation are justified but also whether the funds
allocated to these programmes are being used in an
appropriate fashion.

3.4.3. Naturally this demand applies equally to the
forwarding of the report on the evaluation of the final
results of the programme as provided for in
Article 5 (2).

_The Chairman_

_of the Economic and Social Committee_

Alfons MARGOT