Estonia: a candidate country's thoughts on future European research policy
The documents giving Estonia's reactions to the European Commission's communication on a European research area (ERA) and its proposal to make it a reality through the next research framework programme, are now available. As a candidate country to the European Union, Estonia's appraisal of the Commission's plans to open up and better integrate research in Europe adds another perspective to the reactions received so far from the EU Member States. 'Increasing integration of candidate countries into the European Research Area needs...bigger involvement [of] candidate countries into the decision making process,' says Estonia. One step towards achieving this could be to open up CREST meetings to observers from candidate countries and other consultative areas, it suggests. The country has had a largely positive experience of the EU's framework programme so far, its reveals. 'We specifically note a smooth adjustment of our researchers for the specialised PECO-Copernicus-type programmes to full participation in the Fifth Framework programme (FP5) and measures have been taken to achieve a substantially larger participation of our SMEs as well....development of innovation activities and promoting technology oriented SMEs and better infrastructure for national and international cooperation 'are of primary interest to the Estonian economy,' it says. But what Estonia is most concerned about is its workforce. 'The most important base for Estonian RTD development is the presence of qualified human resources,' it says. 'In the case of the Fifth Framework programme there have been certain limitations for researchers from candidate countries that should be eliminated in the next framework programme.' Activities like the Marie Curie Host fellowships should be opened to organisations from candidate countries with Marie Curie development host fellowships also extended to these regions, according to Estonia. 'Also in the case of the Marie Curie individual fellowships, young researchers from associated countries should be able to apply if the host organisation is from another associated country,' it adds. 'Current restrictions on mobility between associated states themselves cuts off half of the [possibilities] for fellows from associated countries and does not seem to be reasonable.' The main activities of the framework programme have had a significant impact on the integration of Estonia's own research to the priorities outlined in FP5, reveals Estonia. But, it says 'there is a feeling that the priorities outlined in the thematic programmes are too narrow and are not flexible enough to address new challenges. 'Estonia welcomes a general policy to increase the impact of fundamental research in FP6 (the next framework programme) because it increases sustainability of an innovative novelty seeking atmosphere, needed to be significantly encouraged in the European RTD enterprises in general.' In the spirit of the ERA, Estonia says it is willing to take more concrete steps to open up its own horizontal research programmes. For example, it says: 'We would be interested to discuss with the Commission...how to find the best ways to open up the Estonian Gene Heritage programme to the researchers of the Member States (and to the third parties in general).' Welcoming the Commission's determination to put more emphasis on more long-term and ambitious large projects, Estonia suggests: 'Selections of clearly justified priorities for and the implementation of large projects should be organised in such a way that they would not undermine an innovative activity and search for novelty at a level of research groups...It is very important that setting up large-scale projects will not prejudice [...] the importance of small- and medium-scale projects.' According to the Estonians, large-scale infrastructures, like the GRID, need to be implemented centrally. But, in order to build up horizontal collaboration, it says, 'a regional approach is likely [to offer] a natural beginning and is likely to bring concrete results faster.' Estonia also welcomes plans to develop networks of excellence and reveals it has introduced the concept into its own national RTD organisational and financing scheme. 'As far as research infrastructures are concerned,' it continues, 'we wish to see [the] continuing leading role of the Commission in building up European information networks for research. GRID-type concepts should be developed art speed.' And, in particular, it adds that Estonia could see strong benefits in promoting virtual centres of excellence. 'A rapid build up of a common European education and research network should be considered as one of the top priorities,' says Estonia. 'Its essence is in a rapid increase in network quality...at a reasonable price. Estonia is ready and willing to discuss matching funding, and expects leadership by the Commission in this vital issue on a long term planning basis.' Staying on the subject of networking excellence, Estonia also warns that clear procedures and criteria are needed to distinguish between a joint research project under a framework programme and a centre of excellence scheme. Coordinated implementation of national and European research programmes is particularly important for small countries like Estonia, it continues. 'The main issue is in using national public resources for cross-country financing,' it says, urging the problem to be addressed. As a candidate country, Estonia welcomes suggestions from the Commission to combine Structural funds with the R&D funds provided by the Framework programmes. Although it asks the Commission to be 'equivocal...and more pro-active in encouraging governments to channel such funds for the development of research and development capacity and innovation in general.' 'Alternatively, a SRIDE-type programme would be worthwhile discussing, since a specialised instrument like this programme would allow a significantly enhanced R&D infrastructural modernisation without being in conflict and direct competition with many of their needs.' The Estonia government has started its own internal debate on the role of technological development in the nation's future and it has called for an increase in the share of RTD in its GNP and more focussed objectives. 'Estonia understands that measures taken by the Commission and EU in general must find an adequate reaction by steps, taken here in Estonia.' 'The real ERA is not an abstraction,' concludes Estonia. 'Its development must be able to take together many equally important aspects.'