Exclusive: Brussels claims progress on tech institute

EU Education Commissioner Ján Figel

Ján Figel, EU education commissioner, said in an interview with Science|Business that the “political agreement” he considers “most probable” would entail formal launching of the EIT administration next year - but with funding at first for only one major R&D project, possibly in the field of energy and global-warming. Decisions on additional projects would depend on the outcome of a review later on.

That’s a change from the Commisson plan, published last Autumn, to start with two projects and follow up with four more over seven years, on a total budget of €2.4 billion.

Also under consideration, Figel said, is forming soon an “indicative committee” of experts whose task would be to nominate future members of the EIT’s governing board. That two-step approach to board selection would help insulate the process from political pressure – and thereby help ensure that the institute’s leaders are perceived as world-class experts, rather than political appointees. The aim: to ensure that, like the newly formed European Research Council, the EIT starts off with high credibility in the international scientific and education community.

The German card

Figel made his comments in the wake of news reports that the EIT project – an unusually controversial proposal last year by EC President José Manuel Barroso – was being derailed by Berlin, which holds the EU presidency. Indeed, in the past, German officials had publicly raised questions about the project – in part because of opposition from within Germany’s own academic community. But Figel, a Slovak who has become one of the EIT’s main advocates, insisted that the project is going ahead and twice emphasized that the Germans had “committed” to getting the EIT on the agenda in May or June, at a meeting of the Competitiveness Council.

“Last year, the debate was whether we needed” an EIT, Figel said. “Now, the discussion is about when and how to establish it.” He said he expects a broad “political agreement” will be reached by the end of June – with further details to be worked out in the second half of 2007. Among the issues on the table, he said, are how to handle ownership of discoveries made on EIT projects, and how to involve small enterprises.

For such an anodyne-sounding proposal – spending more money on pan-European collaboration in education and research – the EIT has so far been a political albatross. In large part, say industry lobbyists who follow the issue, it’s because Barroso had flung the idea out into the public arena in early 2006 with little political groundwork. The initial talk was of creating a European analog to such successful US institutions as the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, mixing business, research and education.

The political fuss

But it immediately raised hackles among European academics. The fear was that, far from helping European education and research, the EIT would harm it by diverting scarce funds away from existing universities, and breaking up successful research teams already established in such places as Cambridge, Oxford, Stockholm and Munich. Last year, the League of European Research Universities took the unusual step of issuing a statement publicly questioning the plan’s wisdom. The waters were further muddied when Paris started angling to base the EIT in France – reviving an old political fight about proposals to end European Parliament sessions in Strasbourg.

The fuss alienated the business community, on which the EC is counting for co-funding. While a few business leaders made polite noises, not a single multinational has stepped forward to pledge funding.  Figel, who has been meeting with a string of business leaders about the plan, said he doesn’t expect industry to make decisions until the main political issues are settled – but he professed confidence that business support will come.

With so much controversy, the Commission late last year overhauled the original concept and decided to make the EIT a “virtual” university. It would have a small, central office whose task would be administration and selection of research projects – but the work itself would be in the form of specific projects undertaken by large networks of university researchers, educators and companies across Europe. These Knowledge and Innovation Communities, or KICs, would conduct joint research, share knowledge, and train students. The students could opt for dual degrees – one in their home university, and one from the EIT itself.

‘Not a zero-sum game’

The most persistent criticism is that EIT risks duplicating existing EU research programmes  – but Figel said the EIT’s KICs would be focused projects that cut across disciplines and add a dimension of education. They will complement, rather than compete with, existing programmes, he said. “It’s not a zero-sum game. We want to mobilize more resources” behind research and education. KICs, which would be proposed by researchers and selected by the EIT board, could eventually include green energy, climate change, nanoscience and computational sciences, he said.

When asked about the political compromise under discussion, Figel said:

“The probable outcome of the current debate is a kind of two-stage approach.  The governing board and the legal body of EIT would be established and one KIC selected (in 2008.) And then based on the first experience, and the input of the governing board, the Commission would be invited to propose a further, second stage” expansion to fund additional KICs. He said that would happen by 2011.

For now, he said, the plan is first to reach “agreement to establish it, and then based on the evaluation we can propose further. I think it’s a logical proposal, when you have so many countries that are divided – some are supportive, some hesitate. This approach reflects the reality, but it means progress. It means the political will to establish EIT as a legal body, operational in the sphere of knowledge in Europe. That’s important.”