|
European
Council of Civil Engineers |
||||
|
CIVIL
ENGINEERS’ POSITION PAPER IN REGARD TO THE 6TH FRAMEWORK PROGRAMME |
||||
Achilleas
MITSOS,
Director-General Porto,
4th of March of 2002 Dear
Sir, The
European Council of Civil Engineers (ECCE) represents the majority of the
associations representing individual professional civil engineers in European
countries. Its member organisations
represent 22 different countries and together represent over 500,000
professional civil engineers. ECCE
was created in 1985 through the common belief among European civil engineers
that they are better placed to advance Europe’s built environment and protect
its natural environment by working together. The Council works both at a pan-European and national level
to advise governments and industry and to foster uniformly high professional
standards throughout the region. It
also collaborates with the world’s other major professional civil engineering
associations, particularly those of the USA and of Japan. Individual
members represent research, design, manufacture, construction, services,
management, education, administration and other facets of the Construction and
Real Estate Cluster – CREC in Europe. ECCE
recognises the vital role which research and development – R&D plays in
advancing the competitiveness of the CREC and in improving its services to
consumers and other clients. Thus we have established a Task Force on R&D to
follow-up and contribute to the preparation of the EU’s 6th Framework
Programme for Research and Technological Development – EU6RTD. As
a result, we are now sending you our observations and proposals concerning the
EU6RTD document as it appears after the resolutions made in their first reading
by the European Parliament and the Research Council (initial). 1.
EUROPEAN INPUT TO R&D SHOULD GROW
According to Eurostat information published in November 2001, in 2000 the
share of R&D expenditure in GDP was 1.90% in the EU. This percentage is as
it was in 1995, and actually decreased 0.02% from 1999. At the same time the gap
with the United States and Japan, which spent respective shares of their GDP of
2.64% and 3.04% on R&D in 1999, has been widening. We understand that most R&D is carried out at national levels, yet
only two EU member states, i.e. Sweden (3.80%) and Finland (3.19%), equalled the
contribution made by our principal competitors.
ECCE supports the ideas of the European Research Area – ERA, but
considers important that EU6RTD
funding should increase in real GDP terms. 2.
CONTINUING NEED FOR INDUSTRY-originated
“BOTTOM-UP” PROJECTS
Europe’s manufacturing industry produces goods and services valued at
around EURO 4,000 billion a year. Different companies have innumerable problems
to solve and as many good ideas to develop. These are not suitable for big
integrated projects, yet many companies in several member states and candidate
countries could exploit their results.
According to the original Commission proposal, these good projects may
only obtain funding under the SME stimulation activities, i.e. as Co-operative
– CRAFT and new Collaborative research projects. These are not, however,
applicable to most medium size and larger companies.
The Research Council has expressed its strong desire that
“traditional” RTD instruments remain effective. In its resolution, the
European Parliament wanted an additional instrument, the “Stairway to
Excellence”, added to the instruments proposed by the Commission, principally
serving the same purpose as the Council’s opinion.
ECCE strongly supports the above changes and proposes that traditional RTD projects should be clearly defined as an additional
instrument effective for the whole period of the programme, not only for
a limited period, as stated by Parliament, nor as an exception, as later
indicated by the Commission. To make this effective in practice, it would be
very useful to allocate specific funds for these smaller RTD projects.
In giving consideration to the manufacturing industries in general, as
well as the construction industries in particular, the existing GROWTH programme
has been very important. Now, however, funding for the related
“Nanotechnologies and nanosciences, knowledge-based multifunctional materials
and new production processes and device” programme is some 35% lower
(considering aeronautics) and the description is far from fitting that of
conventional industries. Nonetheless, manufacturing systems, equipment and
processes still need improvement. Also materials other than intelligent or
knowledge-based multifunctional ones are appropriate for further, fruitful
development. We therefore propose
that funding
for materials and new production processes should be increased. The
required related additions to the specific programme and work programme would
then follow. 3. WELCOME CHANGES IN THE STRUCTURE
ECCE welcomes the structural changes made by the European Parliament and
the Council. We believe that
separate (sub-)programmes and funds for Sustainable energy systems (including
energy saving and energy efficiency in buildings) and Sustainable surface
transport (including interoperable transport systems and avoiding traffic
congestion) are beneficial for the built environment. 4.
SMEs NEED AN EXPLORATORY AWARD
We observe with pleasure the increase of thematic programmes funding to
SMEs from 10% to 15%. Collective research projects, a new instrument, appear
promising. Yet it appears that the Exploratory Award is not continued. We are
well aware of the different related problems, such as long and complex total
process, administrative burden and problems etc. Without an Exploratory Award,
however, CRAFT projects may not materialise. No national or regional free
advisory service (possibly EU-funded) can replace them.
ECCE strongly recommends that Exploratory
Award should be kept alive; we propose a suitable amount might be 30 –
60,000 EURO per project depending on the requirements. Simplifying and
streamlining the administrative process can overcome most if not all of the
existing problems. 5.
EFFECTIVE USE OF ARTICLE 169
According to the Commission proposal, participation in national
programmes carried out jointly, pursuant to Article 169 of the Treaty, would be
now possible. This is a very welcome new instrument. In addition to creating
synergy benefits, it makes it possible to make wide use of the results of
various national, regional and industry sector development programmes.
At present these are often only used in the country concerned. This would
also open a way for Candidate Countries to participate in major European
development programmes, where their own circumstances would be properly
observed.
In its 30th October 2001 Meeting, the Research Council invited
the Commission to come forward with proposals to the Council and the European
Parliament for Community participation in any such pilot programmes. This is
interpreted to mean that the Council and European Parliament should approve any
such joint programme under the co-decision procedure. ECCE hopes that the
ongoing process in the Council and European Parliament leaves approval
of joint programmes flexible. Otherwise it would be difficult if not
impossible to use this instrument. We
hope this contribution will prove useful in your work towards a successful new
framework programme, and would be pleased to respond to any queries you may have
in relation to our stated position. We
wish to express also our willingness to contribute to the setting up of Specific
Programmes and of Work Programmes. Yours
faithfully On
behalf of the European Council of Civil Engineers
ECCE’s
position statement regarding the 6th Framework Programme for Research
and Development was also sent to: 1.
Fabio COLASANTI, Director-General EUROPEAN
COMMISSION, DG Enterprise, Rue de la Loi 200, B-1049 Brussels BELGIUM
2.
Gérard CAUDRON, Member
of the European Parliament EUROPEAN
PARLIAMENT, Committee ITRE, Bât Louise Weiss, TO8131, Allée du Printemps, BP 10024/F, F-67070 Strasbourg Cedex, FRANCE 3.
Godelieve QUISTHOUDT-ROWOHL, Member
of the European Parliament EUROPEAN
PARLIAMENT, Committee ITRE, Bât
Paul-Henri Spaak, O8B003. Rue
Wiertz 60, B-1047
Brussels, BELGIQUE 4. Mr.
Carlo de Pauw, ECCREDI Network Coordinator
c/o
WTCB-CSTC, Boulevard
Poincaré 79, B – 1060 BRUSSELS |
|
© 2000-2004, ECCE | European Council of Civil Engineers. A Company limited by Guarantee | Registered in England and Wales No. 2916733 |