EU Framework Programme for European research and technological development : evidence / Select Committee on Science and Technology.
- Great Britain. Parliament. House of Lords. Science and Technology Committee.
- Date:
- 1997
Licence: Open Government Licence
Credit: EU Framework Programme for European research and technological development : evidence / Select Committee on Science and Technology. Source: Wellcome Collection.
36/254 page 28
![Lord Gregson contd. | reached the headlines? Also, can you give us an example of a technological breakthrough of any importance that would merit the spending of getting on for 15 billion in European money? It is an enormous amount of expenditure that is being poured out on this lot. I do not remember seeing a headline. (Mr Wright) In terms of the first one, trans- national achievements, one can quote for example in the biotechnology area some of the work that has been done upon gene sequencing on the model plant arabidopsis, and on baker’s yeast, which is I think the first time that a genome sequence has been completed on such an important species. That is a classic example of working across national boundaries to achieve something which would not be achieved otherwise. 6. It is not a trans-national issue of any importance, is it? (Mr Wright) It is a trans-national issue. It is a global issue to try and learn from _ these opportunities. It is the sort of thing that cannot be dealt with except trans-nationally. I think that is an important aspect. 7. But that is a world programme. It is not a European programme, is it? (Mr Wright) Yes, there is a world programme as well on genome mapping, but I think it is recognised that in terms of genome mapping one is not going to get very far working in isolated groups. It is very important to bring together teams from different countries, either globally or in Europe. 8. On a world basis? (Mr Wright) On a world basis, but in Europe as well because there are in fact commercial opportunities that will result from this work so that it is worth Europe itself keeping up with it. 9. What is a great technological breakthrough which these billions of ecus have produced? (Mr Wright) I would not point to any one particular technological breakthrough. There is a range of success stories which have been produced and have been published. There is a booklet published by the IT programme on the major achievements of the IT programme, and there tend to be very many of them. There are a lot of significant breakthroughs in that area for example. There are other examples from almost all of the other aspects of the programme in the other areas. 10. You would not describe those as technological breakthroughs, would you? Most of them are a bit trivial, are they not? (Mr Wright) Certainly the participants in the programme believe that there is some technological value in it in that they keep coming back for more. Lord Gregson] They are getting paid. It is cash for nothing, is it not? / Lord Phillips of Ellesmere 11. Could we go back to your definitions of the sort of research that you would like to see the framework programme supporting? Can I begin by saying that I was a little disappointed to find in your discussion from paragraph 29 onwards in your paper what seemed to me to be a view of research and development which was underpinned by the linear model, that things necessarily begin with basic research and go on to apply the research through to development and then production and so on. That I thought was a model which was now thoroughly discredited and I hoped it was not a part of your thinking. But then you go on in your paper, and I thought to begin with it must have been a mistake, and tell us that you think the programme should not deal with near market research. “Near-market” was a term introduced unfortunately in discussions in this ~ country in about 1987 but which has never figured in Frascati and is not understood anywhere else, I paragraphs 2.20 and onwards, I thought effectively put it on one side even in UK consideration. That is not reflected in your paper at all. Then you go on to talk about applied strategic research. We have a lot of difficulty with Frascati because Frascati does not recognise strategic research either. We have had to take trouble defining that. You have now invented something called applied strategic research which does not figure in Frascati and which nobody in Europe would understand and which I do not understand. As I say, I thought it was a mistake. It figures in the summary of your position paper but then when we get to the part that you have quoted it turns into objective-driven applied and strategic research. In your verbal introduction you were back with applied strategic again. Just what is the sort of research that you want to see the European programme focusing on? (Mr Wright) I accept that there may be some confusion in this area. 12. Is that intentional confusion? (Mr Wright) No, it is not intentional confusion. The Frascati definitions clearly provide us with useful reference points on what one might describe as being a linear process, but in fact one recognises that all these areas blur into one another and there is no linear process moving from one end to the other in terms of research. The message we are trying to get across in the case of the Commission is that we expect the framework programme to cover a broad range of areas of research, but we are delineating, we hope, the ends of that range. At the one end we are saying that the framework programme should not be used to support basic research per se but it should be used to support basic research which is deemed to be necessary by the users of research to enable them to bring on the technologies for the future. At the other end of the scale we are saying that the programme should not be involved in product development. It should not be involved, in the Frascati terms, in experimental development where essentially the benefits accrue to the particular users of that research directly. In this broad area in the middle between basic and product development we are trying to position the framework programme. I accept fully that it is very confusing. The Frascati defintions were invented initially to try and help. In some ways they have and in some ways they do not provide us with the full answer. We are trying to establish that answer as far as we can descriptively in the paper.](https://iiif.wellcomecollection.org/image/b32218734_0036.jp2/full/800%2C/0/default.jpg)
