Transcript “ERA” EUROPEAN RESEARCH AREA TUBITAK, International Cooperation Directorate

TÜBİTAK
“ERA”
EUROPEAN RESEARCH
AREA
TUBITAK, International Cooperation Directorate
Ankara, December 2000
History
TÜBİTAK







2 December 1999: Research Council
18 January 2000: Commission proposed the creation of
ERA
23-24 March 2000 Lisbon European Council: Endorsment
of ERA project as a central component of the
establishment of a European knowledge-based society
15 June 2000: Research Council meeting to take the
necessary steps to make a start on realising project
18 May 2000: European Parliment supported the ERA
project
4 October 2000: Communication - “Making a Reality of the
European Research Area”
16 November 2000 Council meeting on Research
TÜBİTAK
Research Situation in Europe
“Europe might not successfully achieve the transition to a
knowledge-based economy, because...”

Average EU research effort 1.8% of EU GDP vs 2.8% in
USA, 2.9% in Japan
 Increase in gap between total public and private
expenditure on research in USA and Europe (60 billion
euro in 1998, 12 billion euro in 1992)
 Number of researchers only 2.5 in every thousand of
industrial workforce in Europe, 6.7‰ in USA, 6‰ in Japan
 Trade balance in high-tech products showing a deficit of
EUR 20 billion/year in Europe over past ten years
TÜBİTAK
Research Situation in Europe
“ If technological progress creates the jobs of tommorrow, it is
research which creates the jobs of the day afer tomorrow...”

The number of degree-level European students in USA
twice as high as the number of American students at that
level in Europe, 50% of Europeans studying for a
doctorate in USA, stay there for a long periods or forever.
 Research and technology account for 25 to 50% of
economic growth: a strong influence on competitiveness
and employment and quality of life
 Current trends in research having a negative influence on
development of employment in Europe in years ahead
TÜBİTAK
What is ERA?
“ERA will be a product of a joint effort by EU, its Members and
research stakeholders...”
 Creation
of a frontier-free area for research where
scientific resources creating jobs and increasing
Europe's competitiveness
 A political
concept between the Commission,
Member States and intergovernmental institutions to
build a European scientific community with links with
European industry
TÜBİTAK
Aims
“R&D is a key factor in competitiveness, employment and
the quality of life...”
 job
creation
 economic growth
 obtaining maximum innovation benefits from national
and EU research
 establishing a favorable environment for the creation
and development of innovative enterprises
TÜBİTAK
Why is ERA Needed?
“Gap between the scientific world and the people at large is
growing....and the main obstacles in EU are;”
 Europe's
unfavourable legislative and economic
environment
 mobility in Europe
 absence of S&T references for policy
 lack of entrepreneurship in Europe
 "brain drain"
 shortages of trained Europeans
 negative attitude of the European public towards
innovation
 lack of a sound research policy of Europe
TÜBİTAK
Why is ERA Needed?
“Due to recent research situation in Europe, EU needs;”

real complementarity of research policies and
programmes at all levels
 essential contribution of research to other EU policies
(environment, food safety, regional development, or
transport)
 scientific expertise increasingly needed in practically
all policy areas
 solutions to problems in use of research results,
patenting, intellectual property and associated issues
TÜBİTAK
Why is ERA Needed?
...and EU needs;
go beyond present static structure: “15 + 1” (15
series of national programmes + Framework
Programmes)
 to
 to
develop a more coherent implementation of the
actions of Member States at the national level, of the
Union within the Framework Programme and other
policy instruments, and of inter-governmental
research organisations
Building of a Research Area
TÜBİTAK

Framework programmes : a strategic tool for
establishing ERA

Linking FP’s with national activities & intergovermental
cooperation initiatives

Decompartmentalization and better integration of
Europe’s scientific and technological area

Networking and opening-up by the autorities of national
research programmes

Establishment of network of exellence in public and
private sector

International and global dimension in European research
activities
Building of a Research Area
TÜBİTAK

“Scientific excellence” and “European added
value”

Setting up of large-scale targeted projects (
including cluster projects ) particularly in industrial
research

Strengthening research infrastructures

Link between research and innovation and the role of
SME’s: setting-up of technology based
enterprises

Strengthening links between research policies and
the needs of society

Strengthening Europe’s human resources for
development of a knowledge-based economy
Building of a Research Area
TÜBİTAK
“ Three important aspects while creating ERA...”

European
cooperation:


and
technological
better coordination of the activities of various organizations
and between those activities and EU activities
Regional dimension:


scientific
full use of dynamic and potential of the regions by
networking and activities with regard to research, innovation
and technology transfer, where common problems.
International dimension:



to fully integrate the countries applying for accessions
to enable European researchers and industry having
access to knowledge and technologies produced elsewhere
in the world
to mobilise the EU’s scientific and technological capacities
Building of a Research Area
TÜBİTAK
“New instruments to be developed...”
 A broader
programme-based approach
 Closer linkage with international structures and
organizations for scientific cooperation (e.g. COST,
EUREKA, ESF, etc.)
 Synergies with national research funding bodies
 Strategic projects

Extension of activities in training and mobility or
optimising infrastructures
TÜBİTAK
“ERA”
SPECIFIC THEMES OF
ACTION
TUBITAK, International Cooperation Directorate
Ankara, December 2000
TÜBİTAK
1. A Stock of Material Resource and
Facilities Optimised at the European
Level
1.1 Networking of centres of excellence and creation of
virtual centres:
 centres of excellence: where research and technological
development (RTD) performed at a very high, often worldclass level
 mapping of European centres of excellence for better
transparency in this area
 creation of “virtual centres of excellence”: electronic
networks involving universities and companies
 financing plan for centers of excellence on the basis of
competition between public and private research operators
TÜBİTAK
1. A Stock of Material Resource and
Facilities Optimised at the European
Level
1.2 Defining a European approach to research
infrastructures
 large-scale infrastructures at European level: a central role
in the progress and application of knowledge in Europe (for
example radiation sources, computer centres and databases
on molecular biology)
 analysis of responsibilities as regards creation, operation
and access : Financial responsibilities and developing a
European approach for creation of new installations &
functioning the existing facilities
 assesment of needs to be met at European level (including
joint services)
 establishment of a framework for discussion
TÜBİTAK
1. A Stock of Material Resource and
Facilities Optimised at the European
Level
1.3 Better use of potential offered by electronic networks
 virtual laboratories, remote operation of instruments,
quasi-unlimited access to complex databases (for
example, World Wide Web developed by a CERN
researcher, to cover the needs of physicists)
 awareness-raising and training campaigns for
researchers
 e-Europe initiative at the Helsinki Summit to promote
maximum use of these networks by the community of
researchers
 telematic network at larger capacity levels:
 34 Mbits/s, 155 Mbits/s now, and soon 622 Mbits/s, the ultimate
objective being to achive several Gbits/s
TÜBİTAK
2. More Coherent Use of Public
Instruments and Resources
2.1 More co-ordinated implementation of national and European
research programmes (Concerted actions)
 adoption of the principle of reciprocal opening-up of national
programmes; extended to include applicant countries
 establishment of information exchange mechanisms on the
objectives and content of national programmes
 support for initiatives to evaluate national activities by
international panels
2.2 Closer relations between European organisations for scientific
and technological co-operation
 cooperation between EU research programmes and
organizations like ESF, ESA, EMBO, EMBL, CERN, ESO,
ESRF, ILL, EUREKA, COST
 Council of senior officials for political consultation between
these organisations
TÜBİTAK
3. More Dynamic Private Investment
3.1 Better use of instruments or indirect support to research
 to stimulate private investment in research and development
 to create researcher and technician posts in companies
 development of user-friendly information systems on
existing media
 the exchange and spread of good practices to stimulate
private investment in research, particularly among SMEs,
and innovation
3.2 Development of effective tools to protect intellectual property
 national patents valid only in the Member States, costly
system as an obstacle to widespread use of patents in
Europe
 creation of a standard Community patent to cover all of the
European territory
 greater consistency of the intellectual property systems
used in public research programmes
TÜBİTAK
3. More Dynamic Private Investment
3.3 Encouragement of the creation of companies and
risk capital investment
 creation of spin-offs from universities and development of
incubators for technology companies (high tech companies by
researchers and low a level of risk capital investment in hightech sectors)
 finacing of initiatives by companies and industrial
associations, national innovation programmes and European
Investment Bank and EUREKA
 Initiatives be encouraged to bring scientisits, industrialist
and financiers at all levels into contact: “Investment Forum”
“national research centres and the JRC have joined forces to
provide innovative start-up companies with the technical
support and expertise they need to develop...”
TÜBİTAK
4. A Common System of Scientific and
Technical Reference for Policy
Implementation
4.1 Developing the research needed for political decisions
 science and technology in the policy-making process, trade
negotiations and international discussions
 alignment of research on the major concerns of the
individual and the decision-makers (environmental
protection, food safety and chemical products or nuclear
safety)
4.2 Establishment of a common system of scientific and technical
reference
 the JRC’s significant role in the development of a
European scientific and technical reference area
 establishment of a common system of reference at Union
level by aligning methods, harmonising procedures and
comparing results
TÜBİTAK
5. More Abundant and More Mobile
Human Resources
5.1 Greater mobility of researchers in Europe
 well-known way of training researchers and spreading
knowledge
 an instrument of information and technology transfer
 cooperation between the academic world and the business
world
5.2 Introduction of a European dimension into scientific
careers
 establishing a career prospects for researchers from other
European countries
5.3 Greater place and role for women in research
 implementation of the “Women in Science” action plan
5.4 Giving the young a taste for research and careers in
science
 better teaching of science
TÜBİTAK
6. A Dynamic European Landscape,
Open and Attractive to Researchers
and Investment
6.1 A reinforced role for the regions in the European research effort
 establishing the best ways of tranferring knowledge to the
economic sector at regional level
 benchmarking of activities and measures undertaken to
encourage research
6.2 Integration of the scientific communities of western and eastern
Europe
 association of applicant countries in the Fifth Framework
Programme for research
 improving research capacities of the countries for accession
6.3 Making Europe attractive to researchers from the rest of the
world
 creation of a system of grants for scientists from third
countries
 maximizing science and technology cooperation agreements
between EU and third countries
TÜBİTAK
7. An Area of Shared Values
7.1 Tackling the questions of science and society in their European
dimension
 a model of society: combination of a market economy, a
high level of social protection and quality of life and a
number of principles, such as free access to knowledge
 a greater coherence of foresigth exercise on
“science/society” questions: technology/work relations or the
principal options in terms of energy, environment and health
 dialogue between researchers, citizensi experts, industrial
managers and political decision makers
7.2 Development of a shared vision of the ethical issues of science
and technology
 comparision of criteria used in national and European
programmes with the prospect of convergence around
common principles while repecting cultural and moral
differences
TÜBİTAK
Criteria and Priorities
“Two aspects to the question of selecting and justifying EU research
activities...”


Public benefit
European added value
Research Priorities
 “post-genome” and into major illnesses
 nanotechnologies
 to develop the information society
 in the aeronautical and space sectors where there is
considerable world competition
 European policymaking in areas characterized by the
presence of strong uncertainties and risks (“precaution
principles”)
 sustainable development model in the broadest sense
TÜBİTAK
Precaution Principles
“ Precaution principles is a part of risk assessment and decisionmaking.
Deciding what is an acceptable level of risk for scoiety is a political
decision...”
When to act?

reliable information making it possible to identify the
potentially dangerous effects of a phenomenon, product or
procedure

scientific uncertainty making it impossible to correctly
assess the potential risks for consumers
How to act?

collection of all available information and performing the
fullest possible scientific assessment by identifying the
missing data, hypotheses to compensate for the lack of data
and the inevitable uncertainties

conclusions of evaluation as grounds for deciding to rely on
the precautionary principle
Concluding Remarks
TÜBİTAK








Spin-offs from research such as action on patents and
easier access to risk capital
Benchmarking research to allow industry and people to
compare different countries’ levels of expertise
More large scale targeted projects
Long term research projects
Network of excellence in all areas
Bringing all stakeholders together
Collective research projects carried out for the benefit of
many SMEs
JRCs’ efforts focusing on activites in scientific and
technical support of the Community polices and European
policymaking
Concluding Remarks
TÜBİTAK

Dual use research: applications in both civil and
defence sector

Impact of measures on the whole research system:
Public and private research systems

Complementary perspectives of Framework
Programme and other intergovermental
programmes (EUREKA,COST, etc.) : Societal
concerns and policy exercises in education, science
and technology as well as market oriented
requirements open to globalization

Link between 6th Framework Programme and ERA
TÜBİTAK
Next Stages
Proposals/analyses on following themes:
 in parallel with 4 October 2000, guidelines paper
 a European space strategy
 benchmarking methodology and indicators (working papers)
 science, society and citizen
 by 31 December 2000
 research infrastructures
 mapping of excellence (working paper)
 in first half of 2001
 human resource and mobility
 regional dimension
 opening up to the rest of the world
TÜBİTAK
ASSESSMENT OF
FRAMEWORK PROGRAMMES
“Comments of the Commission on the conclusion of the RTD
Framework Programmes 5Year-Assessment
October 19th 2000, COM(2000) 659 final”
TUBITAK, International Cooperation Directorate
Ankara, December 2000
TÜBİTAK
Framework Programme
“Framework Programme alone will not be enough to serve the
goals set at Lisbon...”

as tool to achieve the aims of the ERA

only 5% of public spending on research in the EU

the refocusing of European research programmes on
problem solving

Sixth Framework Programme having same
priorities with ERA; mobility of researchers or the
networking of centres of excellence and
infrastructures
Recommendations
TÜBİTAK
“...but the scope of the Framework Programme should also be increased in
line with the need to meet the Lisbon goals and the demands of
enlargement..”
increasing
the percentage of GDP spent in Europe on RTD
to at least 3% over the next ten years
 maintaining the emphasis on social relevance and
continuing to use Key Actions as a way of focusing
programmes
collaborative RTD projects
 emphasising excellence and the participation of leadingedge researchers
 encouraging participants to propose “riskier” projects
 encouraging the mobility of researchers within the EU
and between the EU and elsewhere
TÜBİTAK
Recommendations

retaining support for generic, competence-building RTD
activities
 re-engineering existing structures and procedures
 more flexible, expanded Framework programme
 keeping the distinction between key actions and generic
research within strategic RTD programmes
 promoting large scale and long term projects in Framework
(EU contribution of EUR 700.000 on average for the 4th
Framework Programme: 1.7 million for the 5th Framework
Programme; small scale and short duration)
 the promotion of private sector expenditure on RTD
 increasing the support for SME’s innovation and research
efforts at regional and national level
TÜBİTAK
Improving Candidate Countries’
Participation in Framework Programme
“A political consensus on the need of a global coherent action of all actors
involved to result in the full integration of candidate countries into the
ERA...”





The support of CCs involvement in the preparation and
implementation of FP6 and ERA
Low CCs national spending on RTD (GERD/GDP ratio): The
increase of this ratio to 1% as a goal
Restrictions in CCs legislative systems (making financing of
cross-border co-operation very difficult, oblige industry to pay
value added tax when participating in FP5 projects etc.)
The recommendations of existing evaluations of CCS
national RTD systems
Development of regional innovation system
TÜBİTAK
Improving Candidate Countries’
Participation in Framework Programme

Co-funding by the Commission of RTD infrastructure capacity
building (big investment)

Assistance programmes for RTD for integration/synergy with
Community policy

Support for use of European Research facilities

Actions to support a wider range of institutions having
potential to become excellent and networking of centres of
excellence

Necessity of strategic research aiming at the readjustment of
Science policy

Support of innovative SMEs

Establishment of venture capital