1 / 30

Why Coordination?

Explore the challenges and benefits of coordinating national research efforts in the context of the New European Renaissance. Discover the opportunities and barriers facing European research teams and policymakers. Learn about initiatives like FP7 and barriers like the subsidiarity principle. Join the debate on achieving a more efficient and harmonized R&D landscape in Europe.

jbuckner
Download Presentation

Why Coordination?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Conference on the co-ordination of national research programmes: opportunities and barriers, Manchester,21 October 2005 Why Coordination? Jerzy M Langer Ministry of Science and Information Society Technologies, Poland Benefits, opportunities and barriers

  2. NEW EUROPEAN RENAISSANCE • Europe without top research and education cannot meet the challenges of the XXI Century. And this cannot be achieved without a concerted R&D policy at both national and European levels. Ironically, Europe has no problem putting together excellent football teams consisting of players from several EU countries. Putting together excellent research teams seems much harder. Romano Prodi, "AN ENLARGED EUROPE FOR RESEARCHERS", BRUSSELS, JUNE 2001

  3. We are losing ground on just about all the key factors that matter for our future growth:

  4. ATTRACTING RESEARCHERS Share of Science and 24,2 18,5 Engineering graduates 23,1 (% of new degrees, 2003) EU-25 5,4 Researchers per 1000 labour US 9 force (full-time equivalent, 2003) 10,1 Japan 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Many Graduates – Few Researchers Wake-up Call for Knowledge Europe!Commissioner Janez PotočnikBrussels – 19 July 2005

  5. GERD as % GDP 10-fold disparity in R&D financing across EU-25 is a major obstacle in making coherent European R&D policy and thus coordination! KEY FIGURES 2005, DG Res, EC

  6. FP6 - OVERALL RESULTS

  7. EU-25 NETWORKS OF EXCELLENCE

  8. IS THE PICTURE SO BLEAK?ASSETS AND OPPORTUNITIES

  9. 1. YOUNG PEOPLE POLAND

  10. 2. SCIENCE SPECIALISATION European diversity SCIENCES KEY FIGURES 2005, DG Res, EC

  11. 3. SCIENCE QUALITY CITATION INTENSITY GDP per person in thousands US dollars David A. King, Nature 2004

  12. 4. FINANCIAL RESOURCES Leverage of joint use of individual resources KEY FIGURES 2005, DG Res, EC

  13. We are in trouble, but have a chance, so concerted action is a must SCIENTISTS WORK TOGETHER Hence cooperation tools welcome, but coordination acceptable only at the project level we know best what is good for us

  14. SCIENTISTS WORK AND PUBLISH TOGETHER COURTESY - PROF. A. K. WRÓBLEWSKI, 2005

  15. JOINT INTERNATIONAL PUBLICATIONS 2nd EUROPEAN REPORT ON S&T INDICATORS, EC - 1997

  16. Hungary - 8 times Hungary, Poland Poland - 6 times 5 times JOINT PUBLICATIONS with the USA 1980-1995 with the EU 2nd EUROPEAN REPORT ON S&T INDICATORS, EC - 1997

  17. We are in trouble, but have a chance, so concerted action is a must SCIENTISTS WORK TOGETHER Hence cooperation tools welcome, but coordination acceptable only at the project level (we know best what is good for us) ADMINISTRATORS, POLICY & DECISION MAKERS have another perspective, hence coordination likely, provided they do not lose power and importance

  18. LEGAL FRAMEWORK TREATY – Chapter XVIII • Art. 166 Framework Program • Art. 165 Community and MS shall coordinate their research … to ensure that national and Community Policy are mutually consistent • Art. 169 EC + MS jointly funded programs • Art. 171 New structures possible (EU Parliament involved)

  19. FP 7 - COOPERATION • Collaborative research • Joint Technology Initiatives • Co-ordination of non-Community research programs • ERA-NET and ERA-NET PLUS (common fund) • Art. 169 – variable geometry initiatives • EUREKA and COST synergy with FP • International co-operation

  20. BARRIERS FOR COORDINATIONSUBSIDIARITY PRINCIPLE AT WORK • Specific national rulings • Review schemes (national - must) • Resident vs. non-resident financing • What allowed (e.g. stem cells, GMOs, etc) • Diverse funding schemes • Ministries vs. Research Councils • Different fiscal rules and scales • Full vs. partial cost, backup funds • Different budgetary rules (e.g. yearly base) • Different priorities and legal consequences • Different scale of resources • GERD (0,35 – 4,5%)

  21. European Commission an initiator an observer –ERA watch a guardian a „facilitator” (financial, personnel) a legal advisor information provider more cost-efficient and simplifying Member States abandon „juste retour” as an old fashioned approach agree on benchmarking and its consequences - openness harmonise procedures (e.g. on peer review, English as acceptable legal language in proposal submittals, timing,…) in-kind money provider A NEW DEAL URGENTLY NEEDED IN R&D EUROPE OMC needs a serious debate – the Austrian presidency welcome to concert it

  22. OPEN METHOD OF COORDINATION • fixing guidelineswith specific timetablesfor achieving the goals • quantitative and qualitative indicators and benchmarksas a means of comparing best practice; • periodic monitoring, evaluation and peer review. • translating these European guidelines intonational and regional policiesby setting specifictargets and adopting measures LISBON EUROPEAN COUNCIL, CONCLUSIONS, 2000

  23. OMC IN NATURE Ice flake Bacterial colony SELF-ORGANISATION

  24. AREAS OF COORDINATION • Concerted actions needed in EU-25 to stay on a Lisbon track and win: • Research (themes, policies, actions) • Education (Bologna process) • Innovation

  25. SME’s in BERD (%) 2002 SMEs in Europe relatively large part of business expenditure BERD Chance for most innovative SMEs in developing European regions EUROSTARS initiative of EUREKA KEY FIGURES 2005, DG Res, EC

  26. EUROSTARSCentralised common pot Funding of SME-driven innovation projects by EUREKA MS and the EC through an article 169 initiative Centralised common pot - International assessment –centralised funding EUREKA, HLG & GA, Maastricht - 2005

  27. EUROSTARSDecentralised common pot Funding of SME-driven innovation projects by EUREKA MS and the EC through an article 169 initiative A decentralised common pot - joint call and evaluation – national funding EUREKA, HLG & GA, Maastricht - 2005

  28. EUROPE NEEDS GRAND VISION FOR XXI CENTURY From ERA to REI • European Research Area – New FP & increased budget • European Higher Education – Bologna Process; EIT? • European funding of basic research • European Research Council • European promotion of Innovativeness • European Innovation Council

  29. If Europe in the XX century could agree on common coal & steel and then agricultural policies, why then not to have common Research, Education and Innovation policies for the XXI century? How is it possible to expect that mankind will take advice, when they will not so much as take warning? Jonathan Swift The Battle of the Books and Other Short Pieces

More Related