Do we need a European Research Council? Busquin gives his view
EU Research Commissioner Philippe Busquin has given new details on how he views the future European Research Area (ERA) and spoken of how a European Research Council could complement the initiative. Speaking at a Danish Presidency event entitled 'Towards a European Research Area. Do we need a European Research Council?' on 7 October, Mr Busquin described how the ERA is an evolving concept, which has already been a catalyst for a change in attitudes. He also took the opportunity to reiterate the goals of the ERA. 'The European Research Area project is based on a simple finding: if Europe is to become more than just the second world scientific power [...] transfrontier cooperation and collaboration are necessary but not sufficient,' said Mr Busquin. The Commissioner admitted that the concept of the ERA is actually not new, 'since it has been lurking in the background throughout the process of building Europe for nearly thirty years.' Since the Lisbon Council in 2000, the idea has however acquired politically operational status. Mr Busquin also said that the ERA itself is not the end goal of the project. It is a mere first step 'towards a real European research policy which is more than just the sum of the science policies of the EU, the intergovernmental cooperation organisations and the various European countries,' he said. Mr Busquin said that he wanted the term 'European research' to mean more than 'made in Europe' or 'EU funded', and to be used in the same way as the term 'American research'. The project should combine a real 'internal market in research' with a 'genuine coordination of national research activities and policies, which represent 80 per cent of the total European research effort,' said the Commissioner. Mr Busquin claimed that discussions on the establishment of a European Research Council are proof of the impact that the ERA has had on attitudes, particularly among national research organisations. This change of attitude is also apparent from the realisation that it is necessary to supplement the efforts already being made to bring more coherence to national activities,' said Mr Busquin. 'By definition, the European Research Area is not yet a reality. However, it is already much more than just an idea,' said the Commissioner. In order to make it a reality, 'there is a need to establish more powerful instruments of an institutional nature for the coordination of national research policies,' he added, noting that the Commission would present proposals on this issue. Maybe this is where the European Research Council could fit in. Mr Busquin highlighted a number of benefits to European research that such a structure could bring. 'A European Council of the kind envisaged with the objective of supporting basic research in Europe on the basis of considerable autonomy would meet a need which today is being met inadequately,' said the Commissioner. He added that such a council would help to make a reality of the ERA. The Commissioner also has some ideas on the structure of which such a council should comprise. There must be no duplication of structures already in existence, and such structures should be taken into account when defining the tasks of a new institution, emphasised Mr Busquin. He requested that all considerations on the establishment of a European Research Council ask the question of whether it would provide genuine added value. Added value should be visible in terms of the ability to support and reinforce research excellence, in terms of resources and in terms of financial coordination. 'Without pooling a certain amount of national resources, the idea loses a lot of its interest in terms of making a reality of the European Research Area,' said Mr Busquin. ' A certain amount of fresh funding is therefore essential, and it could and should be provided to a significant extent by businesses, e.g. through foundations,' he added. Mr Busquin also called for the gradual introduction of any new institution, involving a pilot phase and trials on a smaller scale. This is undoubtedly the most reasonable and the most realistic way of proceeding, and it will make it possible to achieve results rapidly, given that any radical, heavyweight decision would take a certain amount of time,' he concluded.