In recent times, the debate on the research agenda has been practically monopolized by the issue of embryo stem cell research, which is a matter of indubitable importance – symbolic as well – but risks distracting attention from the broader context of the priorities and goals of European research.
Over the next seven years, these priorities and goals will substantially condition the work of researchers throughout Europe (and therefore also in Italy), with major impacts on people’s lives. In fact, now entering its crucial phase is the long process of approving the Seventh Framework Programme, the main instrument with which the European Union will finance research and development for the period 2007-2013.
The process began almost one and a half years ago with the first draft proposed by the Commission. After the European Parliament had approved this draft in June and agreement was reached among the member states in the Council of the European Union, the Commission amended the text, which now returns to Parliament before becoming operational. For the beginning of 2007, in fact, researchers await the first calls for funding applications. The programme provides a budget amounting to more than fifty billion euros (initially proposed were fully seventy billion).
Among the priority items are information and communication technologies, which alone are allocated one third of the resources available for international cooperation among researchers, and one fifth of the total (more than nine billion), health (around six billion), transport (four billion), nanosciences and nanotechnologies (three and a half billion), followed by energy, environment, food and agro-food biotechnologies, space and security, human and social sciences. Stem cell research should receive 0.7% of the total budget.
Very few of these priorities have been discussed in the media or publicly by scientists, politicians and public opinion itself. Do they reflect current advances and the future prospects of their respective scientific sectors? Do they offer opportunities for cooperation and cooperation with the United States and the Asiatic countries? Do they match the political and economic priorities and goals of citizens and firms? To what complex negotiations and compromises – or indeed clashes – among countries, research communities, industrial lobbies and non-governmental agencies (environmentalists, consumers) does the framework about to be approved respond?
For example, heated controversy erupted when the European executive was accused of ignoring the Parliament’s decision that two-thirds of the funds for non-nuclear energy should be allocated to research on renewable sources and energy saving, financing it with more than 200 million euros a year; a commitment strongly advocated by the Green Euro MPs and by companies operating in sectors like wind power. Also contested was the allocation of 2700 million to Euroatom for research on nuclear energy.
Complaints are often voiced about the public’s scant interest in research and innovation. But is this not an extraordinary opportunity to inform the public and encourage discussion about decisions which are bound to affect the future of research and consequently the future of us all?
Observa Science in Society
Centro di ricerca indipendente
