Venturing into the European Research Area – some far-reaching speculations

1. Venturing into the European Research Area – some far-reaching speculations Wolfgang Polt Institute of Technology and Regional Policy - Joanneum Research / Vienna wolfgang.polt@joanneum.at 6CP Conference ‚Crossing Borders‘, 30.- 31.10.2003, Kismarton/Ödenburg

2. Growing role of European RTD policies? (I) • Increased volume and scope of FPs • New instuments to achieve closer integration of RTD efforts • Open Method of Coordination (OMC) to better co-ordinate national policies • Definition of common goals on the European level • EU becoming an increasingly important actor (...or so one might think...)

3. Growing role of European RTD policies? (II) • FPs still only a small fraction of overall EU RTD expenditure • EU RTD policies not figuring prominently • in the policy agendas of most larger countries • and probably the most developed small countries as well (SF !)

4. The rationale behind the concept: • „Brussels, we have a problem....“: percieved relative weakness in technological development and innovation (despite scientifc excellence, hence the ‚European Paradox‘) • ‚15+1‘-situation led to fragmentation, isolated policies, ‚governance gap‘ and reduced efficiency in policy implementation • „our main message is [...] that the FP alone is not enough to implement European RTD policy. It needs to be complemented by other tools“ (FP assessment panel, 2000)

5. What is ERA ... and what could it probably be? • ERA as a goal • ERA as a political concept • ERA as a an instrument • When will we know when we are there?

6. The main pillars of the current approach: • FP • IPs, NoEs • Art 169

7. Effects of the FP: converging EU RTD systems? • The FPs have had • a ‚europeanisation effect‘ in terms of sustained networking, increased collabortation in publishing etc. • a ‚convergence effect‘ on the participating countries in terms of participation patterns • probably for the smaller/less R&D intensive countries a ‚guidance effect‘ • a ‚distributional effect‘ among member countries

8. What else can we say about the FPs? • The FPs have had • a ‚europeanisation effect‘ in terms of sustained networking • a ‚convergence effect‘ on the participating countries in terms of participation patterns

9. ERA for a ‚growing Europe‘ (I) • ‚Sapir-Report‘: „An agenda for a growing Europe“. July 2003 • Among the main findings: • Europe is underinvesting in R&D and education in comparison to US and Asian countries („growing inadequancy of public support for R&D“) • Europe as a whole is not growing on the „Growth/Technology Frontier“ (indication: trade-off between productivity and employment) • ...while growth in the recent decades was closely linked to innovation and skills

10. ERA for a ‚growing Europe‘ (II) • Recommendations of the ‚Sapir-Report‘: • „Boosting investment in knowledge“: increased spending on R&D and education/HC • Tax credits • IPRs • Centers of excellence • Increased mobility and immigration • ‚Green cards‘ • Portability of social security benefits / compatibility of regulation

11. ERA for a ‚growing Europe‘ (III) • Increasing policy coherence and changing policy governance: • COM should extend its capabilities for strategic decisions, implementation should be devolved to independent bodies: • European Agency for Science and Research (modelled after the NSF) • Fund for economic growth (R&D and innovation, education and training, infrastructure) • ....Funds for convergence, re-structuring....

12. European patterns of RTDI policy: a ‚governance gap‘ • Growth of FPs in scope and volume • ...but RTDI policies – especially in the larger countries´- are still formulated with a pre-dominantly national focus (even those vis-a-vis the EU!) • ... Still a ‚15+1‘ situation: European RTD policy being just an additional layer

13. Governance Regimes in EU policies

14. Outlook for a new ERA • Increasing policy coherence and changing policy governance: • COM should extend its capabilities for strategic decisions, implementation should be devolved to independent bodies: • European Agency for Science and Research (modelled after the NSF) • Fund for economic growth (R&D and innovation, education and training, infrastructure) • ....Funds for convergence, re-structuring....

15. New Member States‘Participation in the 5th Framework Programme Sources: OECD; EUROSTAT; PROVISO latest data Dec. 2002; own calculations (next 19 slides)

16. General Overview

17. Participations per 100 RTD Personell*

18. RTD Personell* and Number of Participations

19. RTD Personell* and Number of Participations

20. Specialisation Patterns by Programme- 5 largest New Member States

21. Specialisation Patterns by Programme- 5 smaller New Member States

22. RCA* (Specialisation Patterns by Programme)

23. Specialisation Patterns based on RCA (5 large New Member States)

24. Specialisation Patterns based on RCA (5 small New Member States)

25. Success Rates* by Programme

26. Success Rates by Programme- 5 largest New Member States

27. Success Rates by Programme- 5 smallest New Member States

28. FIP Charts:Participation of EU-15 4th and 5th Framework Programme

29. Success Rates by Country (4. FP)

30. Success Rates by Country (5.FP)

31. Percentage Distribution of Participations by Programme: Germany in Comparison to all EU-15

32. Relation between Number of Participations in the 4th and 5th FP and Number of RTD Personell

33. Number of Participations in the 4th and 5th FP per 100 RTD Personell

34. RCA-Values Germany, France and GB for Programmes of the 5th FP