Update on the Fifth Framework Programme and DG XII structure

Given the current rate of progress, it is expected that Information Packs for some FP5 key themes maybe ready for despatch towards the end of 1998, with a first call taking place before Easter 1999. The Commission planned to approve the lists of External Advisors so that the draft work programmes could be reviewed starting towards the end of October, but the lists are still being scrutinised by Director-Generals outside DG XII. The European Parliament’s Economic and Social Committee ECOSOC has releases a 70-page report on the EC’s proposals for FP5, which takes the Commission to task for not defining the key actions in terms of problems to be solved and actions that should be taken in the short, mid and long-term. The definitions of the 22 key actions are not precise enough to provide necessary focus and ECOSOC cannot understand why aeronautics has received almost as much funding as all four key actions on the environment. One publication suggests that the Commission has a contingency plan in place to extend FP4 by a year if there is no progress on conciliation for FP5.

Amidst all this, there has been widespread shake-up of staff in DG XII. Lower echelon staff have been given questionnaires to complete, asking them to request transfer to other sections; those who have responded have been given priority in the transfer procedures. Non-responding members of staff have now been advised that if they wish to remain in their current section, they need to fill in the questionnaire and request their current post. Unit heads are being moved by the Commission and it is thought that as many as 90% of current heads will be moved on by January 1999. The structure of DG XII is of course being changed in order to reflect the three major themes of FP5. Each theme will have a Director, with 2 sub-directors dividing up relevant key actions. DG XII will manage the horizontal programmes INCO (see later), to be headed by Jean Gabolde, and Improving Human Potential, to beheaded by Achilleas Mitsos. It is still up in the air whether innovation and technology transfer, previously DG XIII, will be transferred to DG III and DG XIII will have responsibility for Information technology and the Information Society thematic programme. In the areas that will probably be the ‘home’ for biomaterials projects, Promoting Competitiveness and Sustainable Growth, the likely Director is Arturo Garcia Arroyo and the sub-director responsible for Innovative products, processes, organisations and steel will be Ezio Andreta. These names are both familiar from FP4, Brite-EuRam and the biomaterials programme.

There has been the second formal meeting of the Conciliation Committee on 12 October 1998. This Committee seeks to bridge the differences in opinion between the Council and the Parliament. There was no further progress in resolving differences over the budget for the Fifth Framework Programme. The Council’s budget offer was ECU 14,300 million and the Parliament refused to reduce its demand for ECU 16,300 million. Throughout the negotiations so far, The Parliament has supported the amount proposed by the Commission to finance the Fifth Framework Programme. There is also a difficulty that FP5 spans 1998-2002, but the next period of financial perspective for the EU is 2000-2006. The Council is looking to ensure that the budget for FP5 for the 2000-20002 period will be renegotiated depending on the limits imposed by the financial perspective budgets, which have yet to be agreed. The Parliament is concerned that this proposal could effectively suspend implementation of the Programme. The next meeting of the conciliation committee will be held on 10 November 1998. The timetable for agreement is 11 November 1998, if all problems can be ironed out by then, or 25 November for finalisation, with any agreement to be approved by both Council and Parliament within a further six weeks.

One topic that caused disagreement between EU Member State representatives, the European Parliament and the Commission, as well as other consulted bodies, was the future role and budget for the EC’s Joint Research Centre. The outcome is changes in the JRC’s remit, to tie its work in more closely to European policies and the needs of EC Directorates, and a reduction in its budget. A new Institute for Health and Consumer Protection is being set up, to be based at Ispra in Italy, which will focus on activities related to DG XXIV

There are conferences and meetings being held throughout the EU in the next months to present the new thematic programmes of the upcoming Fifth RTD Framework Programme. See STOP PRESS section for more news of some that have come to our attention.

Advice on finding research partners for FP5 is provided in a recent issue of Research Europe (subscription details from Gaëlle Debauge at Subs@ResearchEurope.com). This ranges from trying your own contacts to using the services of professional consultants, and includes contacting non-research networks, using specialist E-mail discussion lists, scanning free on-line databases and putting your own details onto them, making use of Innovation Relay Centres, consult business and technical libraries with databases or directories in the industry or research areas of interest. The EU’s general-purpose CORDIS web-site should certainly be consulted at www.cordis.lu Writing a good proposal is also the key to getting past the first selection stage. In FP4, 15% of all proposals to DG XII failed at this first hurdle because the proposal was not complete, lacked signatures of participants, did not have the necessary trans-national or industry-academic balance, or the costings were not consistent or coherent.

FP5’s International Cooperation INCO programme has a provisional budget of over 450m ECU. Of this, over 210m ECU will be for projects with developing countries and 110m ECU for the programme for former Soviet Union and Eastern European partners. 14m ECU has been earmarked for bursaries for young scientists to work on FP5 projects. Part will be for EU nationals to go to industrialised countries such as Japan, part for scientists from INCO partner countries to come to EU. 55m ECU will be used for co-ordination activities. 37m ECU is proposed for projects with Mediterranean partner countries, including Algeria, Cyprus, Egypt, Israel, Jordan, the Lebanon, Malta, Morocco, Syria, Tunisia, Turkey and the Palestine Authority. Mediterranean countries have asked for more support in FP5 and more opportunity to participate in R&D programmes. A new organisation CoMed has been established to present a discussion and negotiation front to the EC. CoMed has requested that the EC sets up Innovation Relay Centres in the Mediterranean countries.

The Commission has announced how it proposes to allow cost structures for academic and other research groups in FP5 projects. Universities and other public bodies will be allowed to continue using the additional costs structure for reimbursement of all direct costs associated with a project, although the Commission is proposing some significant limitations to cost-recovery, including basing the overhead rate only on the costs of temporary staff engaged to carry out the project and maintaining the current maximum overhead allowance of 20% of direct costs. An alternative will be a ‘full-cost flat-rate’ system, in which 50% of eligible direct costs and 50% of a flat rate for overheads will be reimbursed by the EC. The rate to be used has not yet been decided but may be as high as 80% of identified overheads. The existing full-cost system will continue to be applied to commercial organisations.

Co-ordination costs for FP5 projects will be claimable provided they are specified at the outset. This may allow the temporary employment of project managers for this purpose. The Commission has stated that it will not be enough for the co-ordinator simply to manage information flow. Active management of the project would be required. It may be possible for the administrative and technical aspects to be separated, as is sometimes done at the moment with projects. However, increased justification will be needed for advance payments to a co-ordinator.