EU pushes energy-saving buildings in new programme

The Berlaymont, Brussels: home of the European Commission. Picture courtesy www.berlaymont.
2000.com

The document, one of two major communiqués expected this autumn on innovation policy, sets the stage for an EU summit 20 October that the Finns, who currently hold the rotating EU presidency, have vowed will include a focus on tech policy. The Finns, who currently spend more per capita on R&D than any other country in Europe, are pushing laggard neighbors to step up their own R&D efforts – in hopes of reaching a target to have the region investing on average 3 per cent of GDP in research. Current EU spending is 1.9 per cent – compared with 2.6 per cent in the US.

Few surprises

For the hundreds of corporate lobbyists now swarming around the Brussels policymakers,  there were few surprises in the commission statement – which had followed months of public and private meetings. Notable, however, was the prominence that the commission gave to one initiative, to implement a so-called “lead markets” policy.

The lead-markets notion, advocated last year in a special study on EU technology policy led by former Finnish prime minister Esko Aho, would attempt to harness a mix of public procurement, subsidies and private investment towards creating demand for certain emerging technologies that the market alone wouldn’t yet support. For instance, the commission highlighted research subsidies that it is planning for the development of  “near-zero energy building” – using public new materials, control systems and energy sources to create new standards for energy-efficient construction methods. It said it will test the lead-markets concept next year “in a limited number of areas.”

Extra research grants

The notion has already proved a winner with many companies who hope to garner extra research grants, and so is likely to sail through the torturous EU legislative process.

Still uncertain, however, is the plan for another action point: Creation of a European Institute of Technology, advanced last February by Commission President José Manuel Barroso. His aim: to create a new, pan-European focus for technology development, modeled after such U.S. research organisations as Massachusetts Institute of Technology and California Institute of Technology. But the proposal instantly ran into a buzz-saw of opposition from Europe’s leading research institutes, which feared it would squeeze some of their own grant applications out of the running in Brussels – and ultimately worsen the fragmentation of R&D in Europe.

Toning down

But as a result of bargaining sessions over the spring and summer, many industry lobbyists – many of whom were also cool to the idea – now expect a toned-down version of Barroso’s plan to go through, with the EIT operating as a network for collaboration rather than as an independent educational institute. In its statement on 123 September, the Commission reiterated its intention to propose an EIT – but provided no new details. It said it will make a proposal in October.

As expected, the Commission also made little more than polite noises about the need for member states to rethink their tax policies, in order to encourage innovation. Under EU treaties, tax policy is generally a matter for the members to set – and, though many in the Commission believe European tax policies often discourage R&D investment, the Commission didn’t allow itself to use language any more forceful than a vow to “analyse good practices and provide guidance in the domain of tax incentives.”

Reaction to the Commission’s plan was muted. UEAPME, a trade association for small businesses in Europe, posted a statement on its Web site mildly praising the “lead markets” and public procurement recommendations – but at the same time, warned the Commission about letting the usual cast of multinational companies be the main beneficiaries. The EU “must not create closed markets or new privileged ‘national champions’ at the expense of competition in Europe,” the group said.