CORDIS Archive

Spanish position on the 5th Framework Programme

English version, 11th November 1996

Summary

The preparation for the future FP5 should be based on the experience gained in the research activities currently being developed in FP4 and previous FPs. There should be room for new priorities and the flexibility to facilitate the entry of new ones during the long period of implementation. However, major shifts in the current guidelines are undesirable as they will lead to confusion among the research community. Smooth changes will be more acceptable.

The main structure of FP5 is recorded in the Treaty on EU, where four main activities are envisaged. There is an opportunity to concentrate some of the programmes of the first activity, particularly where overlapping of objectives is evident. Experience shows that such concentration processes are difficult to achieve for several reasons. It also seems reasonable to explore intermediate solutions in those programmes where concentration is not possible.

In addition, the R&D priorities may be better focused to concentrate the effort. This approach is not the solution to the oversubscription problem. More focused priorities result in the reduction of the possible beneficiaries of the programmes.

The budget of FP5 is expected to be restrictive. It is undesirable to take a retrograde step in the financing of R&D at Community level.

The main objectives of FP5 should include economic and social cohesion as a significant contribution to reduce the international isolation of research groups of excellence in less favored regions.

Other priorities envisaged are a sounded contribution to the competitiveness of EU industry as a whole, employment, protection of the environment and contribution to other EU policies.

The concentration in industrial objectives through a matrix structure should not be focused in large industries because of their stronger capacity for influence among Member States and EU institutions. FP5 should help to achieve competitiveness but cannot be transformed into an Industrial policy instrument for large industries within the EU. If a matrix structure is developed, the Member States should be represented.

The competitiveness and future job creation capability of the EU industry depend much more on the technological development of SMEs, particularly those devoted to generic technologies which can be applied to a vast range of sectors.

In terms of the development of international R&D activities, Latin American , North African and Central and East European countries should be given priority.

The need to coordinate the activities dispersed in several national or community services can be developed through the Task Forces scheme currently working in FP4. To be effective, a small allocation for funding management needs as well as strategic studies could be considered. These Task Forces, working as coordination units, should not be further developed to establish research priorities which are the Council's competence.

The development of other articles of the Treaty (e.g. Supplementary Programmes) will be rather difficult at this stage as no previous experience has been implemented and evaluated. The first step must be to establish the rules applicable to such initiatives. Nevertheless, some current Task Forces could eventually be implemented as Supplementary Programmes as they concern only a few Member States.

Some management aspects can be improved and there is experience enough to proceed in FP5. There are many proposals in this area that could be discussed even at this stage.