Europe must close the rhetoric gap

01 Feb 2006 | News | Update from University of Warwick
These updates are republished press releases and communications from members of the Science|Business Network
Europe preaches the knowledge society, but its aversion to risk and reluctance to change has got to go, warns Esko Aho, former prime minister of Finland.

Esko Aho, former Finnish prime minister

European society is averse to risk and reluctant to change. This is alarming enough of itself, but is unsustainable in the face of rising competition from other parts of the world, warns Esko Aho, former prime minister of Finland, in a high-level report, Creating an Innovative Europe, published on 20 January.

“There is a large gap between the rhetoric of a political system that preaches the Knowledge Society and the reality of budgetary and other priorities that have shown little shift in preparing to engage with it,” says Aho in the report.

The Lisbon Agenda mandate of raising research and development spending to 3 per cent of overall gross domestic product is too narrow to deliver the vision of an innovative Europe. Instead, a wide-reaching Pact for Research and Innovation is needed that combines the creation of pan European markets for innovative goods and services, reformed financial structures and new, focused investment.

Implementing this package of synchronised and simultaneous action and investment will require strong political commitment at a national and a European level. “To create an innovative society we need reforms that are not based on the lowest common denominator,” says Aho, chair of an expert group set up by the EU in October 2005 to consider how to move the Lisbon Agenda along.

Unpalatable conclusion

The report, published a bare three months after the brief was handed down at the end of the European Council meeting in Hampton Court, London, reaches the unpalatable conclusion, “Every country [will] need to accept some negative things to reach the overall good.”

The lack of a single, innovation friendly market is the main barrier to investment in research and innovation, and suggestions for overcoming this deficit are at the core of the Pact. This includes measures to harmonise regulations, standards, public procurement and intellectual property laws, and to foster a culture which celebrates innovation.

“The reality of most innovators remains that they face an obstacle course of multiple levels of regulations and requirements, each of which raises costs and lowers incentives,” says Aho.

Measures to improve innovation should focus on electronic health systems, pharmaceuticals, energy, the environment, transport and logistics, security and digital content. These are all fields where Europe has a strong research position and there is a need for innovative products.

Aho’s plan is that an independent high-level coordinator would be appointed to orchestrate European action in each area. Coordinators would be responsible for all aspects of their particular markets, including technology investment and infrastructure, and be empowered to create new processes that span organisational boundaries.

Role model

The role model for the Pact for Research Innovation is the formation of the Single European Market in 1990, when national import duties and tariffs were replaced with European ones. In the short term this may have meant some were winners and some losers, but it was good for all in the longer term.

The problem for Aho’s proposed Pact is that since the advent of the Single Market the mood has shifted markedly. The increase in euroscepticism, (as demonstrated by adverse reactions to the single services directive and the failure to ratify a new constitution), is compounded by the recent enlargement that has made the EU even more unwieldy.

Not only is Aho unhappy about lack of progress on Lisbon, he believes its target of spending three per cent of gross domestic product on R&D is insufficient, and calls for the proportion of structural funds devote to research to be trebled. “Measures are needed to increase resources for excellent science, industrial R&D and the science-industry nexus.”

To capitalise on this increase in spending Europe needs to increase mobility – of human resources, money and knowledge.

“More resources for R&D are a necessity, but they are an insufficient means to achieve the goal of an innovative Europe,” says Aho. “A paradigm change is needed in which European values are preserved, but in a new social structure.”

This may be special pleading of the highest order, but Aho claims the future of Europe is at stake. The continent is living a moderately comfortable life on slowly declining capital. “Europe and its citizens should realise their way of life is under threat.”

The next stage in translating these recommendations into action will be the European Business summit in Brussels on 16 – 17 March, when Aho will speak alongside EU Science and Research commissioner Janez Potocnik, who is due to present a new report on research policy.

Never miss an update from Science|Business:   Newsletter sign-up