Venturing into the European Research Area – some far-reaching speculations Wolfgang Polt Institute of Technology and Regional Policy - Joanneum Research / Vienna 6CP Conference Crossing Borders, , Kismarton/Ödenburg

Growing role of European RTD policies? (I) Increased volume and scope of FPs New instuments to achieve closer integration of RTD efforts Open Method of Coordination (OMC) to better co-ordinate national policies Definition of common goals on the European level EU becoming an increasingly important actor (...or so one might think...)

Growing role of European RTD policies? (II) FPs still only a small fraction of overall EU RTD expenditure EU RTD policies not figuring prominently –in the policy agendas of most larger countries –and probably the most developed small countries as well (SF !)

The rationale behind the concept: Brussels, we have a problem....: percieved relative weakness in technological development and innovation (despite scientifc excellence, hence the European Paradox) 15+1-situation led to fragmentation, isolated policies, governance gap and reduced efficiency in policy implementation our main message is [...] that the FP alone is not enough to implement European RTD policy. It needs to be complemented by other tools (FP assessment panel, 2000)

What is ERA... and what could it probably be? ERA as a goal ERA as a political concept ERA as a an instrument When will we know when we are there?

The main pillars of the current approach: FP IPs, NoEs Art 169

Effects of the FP: converging EU RTD systems? The FPs have had –a europeanisation effect in terms of sustained networking, increased collabortation in publishing etc. –a convergence effect on the participating countries in terms of participation patterns –probably for the smaller/less R&D intensive countries a guidance effect –a distributional effect among member countries

What else can we say about the FPs? The FPs have had –a europeanisation effect in terms of sustained networking –a convergence effect on the participating countries in terms of participation patterns

ERA for a growing Europe (I) Sapir-Report: An agenda for a growing Europe. July 2003 Among the main findings: –Europe is underinvesting in R&D and education in comparison to US and Asian countries (growing inadequancy of public support for R&D) –Europe as a whole is not growing on the Growth/Technology Frontier (indication: trade- off between productivity and employment) –...while growth in the recent decades was closely linked to innovation and skills

ERA for a growing Europe (II) Recommendations of the Sapir-Report: –Boosting investment in knowledge: increased spending on R&D and education/HC Tax credits IPRs Centers of excellence –Increased mobility and immigration Green cards Portability of social security benefits / compatibility of regulation

ERA for a growing Europe (III) Increasing policy coherence and changing policy governance: –COM should extend its capabilities for strategic decisions, implementation should be devolved to independent bodies: European Agency for Science and Research (modelled after the NSF) Fund for economic growth (R&D and innovation, education and training, infrastructure)....Funds for convergence, re-structuring....

European patterns of RTDI policy: a governance gap Growth of FPs in scope and volume...but RTDI policies – especially in the larger countries´- are still formulated with a pre-dominantly national focus (even those vis-a-vis the EU!)... Still a 15+1 situation: European RTD policy being just an additional layer

Governance Regimes in EU policies

Outlook for a new ERA Increasing policy coherence and changing policy governance: –COM should extend its capabilities for strategic decisions, implementation should be devolved to independent bodies: European Agency for Science and Research (modelled after the NSF) Fund for economic growth (R&D and innovation, education and training, infrastructure)....Funds for convergence, re-structuring....

New Member States Participation in the 5 th Framework Programme Sources: OECD; EUROSTAT; PROVISO latest data Dec. 2002; own calculations (next 19 slides)

General Overview

Participations per 100 RTD Personell *

RTD Personell * and Number of Participations

Specialisation Patterns by Programme - 5 largest New Member States

Specialisation Patterns by Programme - 5 smaller New Member States

RCA * (Specialisation Patterns by Programme)

Specialisation Patterns based on RCA (5 large New Member States)

Specialisation Patterns based on RCA (5 small New Member States)

Success Rates * by Programme

Success Rates by Programme - 5 largest New Member States

Success Rates by Programme - 5 smallest New Member States

FIP Charts: Participation of EU-15 4 th and 5 th Framework Programme

Success Rates by Country (4. FP)

Success Rates by Country (5.FP)

Percentage Distribution of Participations by Programme: Germany in Comparison to all EU-15

Relation between Number of Participations in the 4 th and 5 th FP and Number of RTD Personell

Number of Participations in the 4 th and 5 th FP per 100 RTD Personell

RCA-Values Germany, France and GB for Programmes of the 5 th FP