1. Why the renewed interest in the European Research Area?

J. Potocnik: I decided to open a new debate on where we want to go with the European Research Area because, put simply, Europe cannot afford to wait any longer. Globalisation is a fact, whether we like it or not, and competition with the US or with countries like China and India is becoming more and more fierce. We are stronger when we work together effectively. Europe’s response obviously lies in further integration and cooperation among countries, all the while ensuring that we do not turn into an exclusive club. ERA is an open area that includes researchers from around the world.

2. Which areas would you like to focus on first?

ERA is above all an area for the free movement of researchers and knowledge, something I’ve called the ‘5th freedom’, after goods, services, capital and people. We have to identify and then remove the obstacles to this free movement that stem from issues like social protection measures or differing status for researchers. Our objective here is clear: researchers who move to another country to do their research should not be disadvantaged, either in that country, or when they return home.

We are also keen to improve knowledge-sharing in Europe, by looking at how we can best organise access to data and research results, and by helping universities and companies to link up.

And we are looking at how Europe can work as a coherent whole in research – so, dovetailing national and European research programmes and priorities.

Another way in which we can improve the organisation of research in Europe is by creating and upgrading common European infrastructures. By doing so, we will not only ensure state of the art facilities for all European researchers, but also create global centres of excellence where ideas can be exchanged and developed.

3. So these are some of the issues, but what’s the objective?

Era Green Paper-cover ERA is not an objective in and of itself; it’s a tool, a lever to help Europe mobilise its research capacities more efficiently to meet today’s most pressing challenges. I see two types of objectives.

The first concerns the major environmental challenges such as climate change, the transition to a low carbon society, water resources, major diseases, world hunger, etc. These are global challenges whose answers depend on European research playing a major role in the spirit of international cooperation.

The second type of objective is more closely linked to the competitiveness of the European economy. It is nothing new to say that we have to invest more in research to be competitive, but we can’t just talk about it, we have to do it.
By increasing support for FP7 by 40%, Europe has led the way, but our example has to be followed on a national level in both the private and public sectors.

4. Are Member States convinced of the necessity of a reinforced ERA?

Of course, and they even acted on that conviction by explicitly mentioning the achievement of the European Research Area in the new draft of the Treaty and by giving the Union legislative power – in addition to the Framework Programme – to make ERA a reality.
I made it 100% clear when we launched this process that we are not looking to create a single European research policy. Member States, Commission, policy-makers, industry leaders and scientists need to unite in a common effort to pursue what is after all our common interest.

5. Are the social sciences and humanities (SSH) included in this approach?

Naturally. I have made a concerted effort to stress the importance of SSH in both the Lisbon Agenda and the European Research Area. The common interests of Europeans are clear in this domain as such research serves to analyse and understand the impact of globalisation, geopolitical challenges, the economic weakness – and growth – of Europe, the aging population, the interaction of cultures, questions of identity and citizenship. Social sciences and humanities can serve as an excellent example of the relevance of ERA. With common infrastructures on the one hand – and FP7 has already identified six common projects on social change, language, cultural heritage, etc – and on the other hand the development of ERANET networks like Norface for social sciences and Hera for humanities,the Commission is showing its strong support for SSH. Additionally, there’s the creation of the Ideas programme headed by the European Research Council (ERC), which funds frontier research projects, including in SSH.

6. What measures will be taken to reinforce the European Research Area in social sciences and humanities?

The SSH programme, which has identified the principal challenges our societies face, is a dynamic framework that invites research teams from different countries to unite their efforts to analyse these problems. Consequently, these efforts must be carried out through coordinated European and national programmes, as well as proactively via the new ERA-NET Plus initiative. We must engage in a more structured dialogue between my services and their counterparts in the Member States to ensure improved mutual information on research trends in SSH throughout Europe and to identify, with the aid of the scientific community, the principle research themes that correspond to common concerns. For example, I’ve noticed that several national centres dedicated to the study of a particular major region of the globe want to collaborate, to share their expertise and develop common research. Why not encourage common research on the major regions of the globe, the understanding of which is essential in the current climate of globalisation. This is but one example of ERA’s relevance and added value.

Source:
Newsletter on EU Research on Social Sciences and Humanities - Issue 9 - 3rd Quarter 2007