Spain supports ERA - but with conditions
The Spanish government has supported the European Commission's communication on the creation of a European Research Area (ERA) in its official response to the initiative, but it would like to see some clarifications of the contents. In its response, published by the Spanish ministry of science and technology, the Spanish government highlights some of its queries and problems with the communications. One of the major ones is mentioned at the outset. 'An underlying problem of the text is the lack of clear differentiation between ERA and the FP6 [Sixth Framework programme]. The Commission should make a better differentiation between the objectives pursued within one and the other initiative in order to avoid the present ambiguity.' The response goes on to follow this lead by dividing up its comments on both the ERA and FP6. Referring specifically to the ERA, it highlights areas where it has suggestions. The Spanish government would like to know more about the scenarios being considered by the Commission for combining the various national and European R&D (research and development) funds. It would also like to see the coordination of national policies among Member States, which, while gradual, should begin as soon as possible. Commenting on the human resources and scientific mobility element of the communication, the response emphasises that the difficult relationship between the public and private sector remains. It suggests that 'further incentives are needed for mobility of degree holders and engineers, by means of R&D projects that enhance cooperation between universities, research centres and industry, with particular emphasis on small and medium sized enterprises.' It also addresses the concerns of the smaller players in relation to the focus on larger projects in the ERA and FP6. 'The ERA philosophy is regarded as an appropriate framework for consolidating the most powerful research groups, but FP6 should not relegate the smaller groups to the sidelines,' its says. Higher investment is still needed in R&D and Spain would like the Commission to reinforce the role of basic research in the role of the ERA. A map of excellence will only be possible if networks of excellence have been established from groups of excellence, providing an adequate level of competitiveness has been established. In order to monitor this, Spain recommends setting up a R&D competitiveness observatory. Finally on the ERA, it also give its full support to the science, society and citizens chapter in the communication, 'and the proposals made there should be developed in their entirety and on a continuous basis.' The response moves on to deal with the FP6, where it again calls for clarity of objectives. It also calls for a dialogue on the guidelines of establishing European research infrastructures, but says 'in any event, we believe it is important that the Commission assumes its co-responsibility for achieving an efficient map of European research infrastructures'. Spain also calls for a balance between long and short term R&D activities in the next framework programme. It calls for a flexible approach in objective selection. 'It is important we do not draw up a closed list. Had a closed list been made at the beginning of the 20th century, how many scientific advances would have been left off the list?' it asks. It also questions the establishment of setting up a body to define priorities, as this is both 'top down' selection and there is no guarantee of the independence of that body. There is also scepticism about the need to concentrate on big budget projects. Some of these from previous programmes have not provided results as significant as hoped for. 'This is what Spain advocates that the large scale project model must be given less budget funding in the Sixth Framework programme.' SMEs (small and medium sized enterprises) should be focused on, but not in isolation. More support needs to be given to helping spin-off companies, and this should not be restricted to just one sector. The European Investment Bank could help in this, by possibly providing seed capital. The final area where Spain poses a question is how there will be adequate provision made for assessment and monitoring of the programme, but it concludes: 'These general conclusions have focused on certain aspects which from the Spanish perspective appear to be problematic, although, as stated at the outset, there is clear support for the ERA initiative and for the Commission's goal of enhancing the scientific and technological competitiveness of the EU with the Sixth Framework programme.'