Next Framework programme should be a refined FP5 with more synergy, says France
An FP6 (Sixth Framework programme) which takes the better 'acquis' from FP5 (Fifth Framework programme), refines them through the introduction of new instruments and focuses them is what France would like to see in the EU's next research framework programme, according to the official French position paper. The programme should also enable European research to fulfil better the objectives assigned to it in the Treaty, fulfil the expectations of citizens, society and an economy based on knowledge. The paper however emphasised that FP6 must not stand alone - it must work in conjunction with other instruments to realise Europe's aims. The document recognises that FP6 is a 'concrete step in the creation of the European Research and Innovation Area', but notes that it also has other objectives to fulfil, namely the objectives set at the Lisbon summit in March 2000, of making Europe the most competitive economy within ten years. On account of limited budgetary resources, the rising cost of research in general, FP6 alone will not be capable of meeting these objectives, the paper argues. Neither can it act as a substitute for a European research effort, assured largely by economic actors in conjunction with national financial incentives. Although FP6 will facilitate the implementation of the European Research and Innovation Area, it is only one among many tools, continues the document. It is therefore essential to make use fully of other Community instruments of intervention, notably thematic programmes, which exist under the heading of 'internal politics' and financial institutions such as the European Investment Bank and the European Investment Fund. Relations between the Framework programme and the EUREKA and COST programmes should also be strengthened in order to create a true synergy. Preparation of FP6 should be accompanied by 'a strategic reflection on the use of available instruments,' states the paper. Areas listed for consideration include reasoning for individual projects, large targeted projects, large programmes using different forms of Community support to fund research and development, variable geometry, the opening up and coordination of national programmes and the creation of networks of excellence. The way to avoid a 'sprinkling' of research is not to exclude certain areas of research, but to introduce targeting in every field. The use of such instruments requires a clarification of the role of the Commission, the paper argues. French priorities largely converge with those of the European Commission: life sciences, information society, transport, energy, manufacturing technologies such as nanotechnologies and the sustainable environment. France supports the European Commission's proposal to select thematic priorities according to their added European value. The future research framework programme has the task of intervening in areas judged strategic, where research at a European level would carry greater value than individual national efforts, and when division between the public and private sectors hinder effectiveness and efficiency. FP6 should also make the most of social sciences, which the paper argues should assist methodological reflection on the evaluation of public politics and encourage experimentation with new procedures for evaluating projects. The next framework programme should also take account of basic research, the technological base of the future and support researcher mobility. With regard to management of the programmes, the paper calls for simplification and flexibility. Costs should also be lowered and the delays in execution cut. Methods of evaluation for both programmes and projects, the system for result dissemination and the role of industry should also be reviewed, states the document.
Countries
France