VERA – Forward Visions on the European Research Area

VERA is funded by the European Union's FP7 programme for research,
technological development and demonstration under grant agreement no 290705

Cooperation in the Context of Complexity: European Security in Light of Evolving Trends, Drivers, and Threats (FORESEC)

Code: B02

Primary project information

Lead: University of Manchester
Additional project partners: AIT, COS, MCST
Type of activity: FLA
Date conducted: 1/9/2008-28/2/2011
Date of Publication: 2011
Duration: 30 MONTHS
Summary: The aim of this project is to pilot the use of foresight to align strategic and applied research with longer-term policy needs in Europe. It addresses a perceived gap in alignment under present arrangements and also argues that to develop, the European system needs a more content-oriented approach. It seeks to advance knowledge on: differences across policy domains in the European Research and Innovation Ecosystem (also further articulating this concept) in terms of the role and the integration of research agendas in long-term policies and vice-versa; appropriate foresight designs needed to get engagement and secure follow-up across policy domains/areas. The project seeks to produce immediately useful results by selecting areas and participants with a view to stimulating action. Four areas with different sectoral characteristics will be selected with the advice of an independent panel to ensure that the pilot covers a range of circumstances. Success scenario workshops will be used to engage policymakers and those responsible for research. The methodology involves consideration of key drivers and wildcards to produce a vision of success. This is compared with the ability of the research and innovation ecosystem in the area to deliver and a roadmap for change is produced.
Financed by: EC funded project
Budget: N/A
Research area/market/industry/sector: agricutlural ecology, ICT in education, minerals, European innovation policy
Main report (full title): Breakthrough technologies: For the security of supply of critical minerals and metals in the Au'; 'Teaching and learning for an ICT revolutionised society'; 'Dynamising innovation policy: Giving innovation a central role in European policy'; ' Foresighting the AgriClimate Ecology: Application of breakthrough technologies to adaptation to climate change in agriculture'; 'PROJECT FINAL REPORT' (97 pp. in total)

GRAND CHALLENGES

Cross-cutting Challenges: There is a general consensus that agriculture in Europe will confront major challenges related to rising global temperatures, an increasing number of extreme climatic events and a series of consequences which may occasionally be positive but the sum total of which threaten food security, health and well-being, particularly but not exclusively in rural regions. (final report, p.6)
Cross-cutting Challenges Shortlist: Rising global temperatures and an increasing number of extreme climatic events threaten food security, health and well-being in Europe
Other Challenges: Already strong competition for access to natural resources, including mineral resources vital to any economy, is likely to accelerate further in the coming years with possible severe environmental and social impacts. The EU economy is more than any other exposed to these issues, as it produces very little of the minerals it consumes, and almost none of the critical minerals it needs to develop its green technologies.
Three dimensions of the challenge were addressed:
- Geology and minerals intelligence:
1. Accessing data on mining, production, geology
2. Knowledge of deeper resources
3. Better knowledge models of how deposits produced
4. Better exploration
5. Systematic data sharing
6. Exploiting ‘exhausted’ mines
- Mining, ore processing and metallurgy:
1. Exploiting deeper deposits
2. Accessing seabed deposits
3. Better health and safety/ predicting seismic events/natural or man-made hazards
4. Using less water/energy
5. Reducing CO2 footprint
6. By-product handling
7. Social/business organisation
- Sustainable Use, Efficiency, Recycling and Re-use:
1. Downstream resource efficiency
2. Better citizens’ understanding/attitude
3. Building capabilities/training
4. Transforming waste into mines/urban mining
5. More systemic view of different critical minerals
6. Better use of other resources – water/energy
7. Global governance of new extractive activities (Final report, pp. 13-14)
Other Challenges Shortlist: - Accelerated competition for access to natural resources, including mineral resources vital to any economy;
- Particularly vulnerability of European economy regarding competition for mineral resources, as it produces very little of the minerals it consumes, and almost none of the critical minerals it needs to develop its green technologies;
- Improve geology and minerals intelligence: Accessing data on mining, production, geology; Knowledge of deeper resources; Better knowledge models of how deposits produced;
- Better exploration;
- Systematic data sharing;
- Exploiting ‘exhausted’ mines; Increase mining, ore processing and metallurgy by exploiting deeper deposits and accessing seabed deposits;
- Improve health and safety in mining, ore processing and metallurgy by predicting seismic events/natural or man-made hazards;
- Increase sustainability of mining, ore processing and metallurgy by using less water/energy, reducing CO2 footprint, by-product handling, social/business organisation;
- Increase sustainable use, efficiency, recycling and re-use by downstream resource efficiency, better citizens’ understanding/attitude, building capabilities/training, transforming waste into mines/urban mining, more systemic view of different critical minerals, better use of other resources – water/energy, global governance of new extractive activities

Summary of relevant aspects

Aspects of ERA Governance: Currently the process that Framework Programmes are constructed and negotiated and the bottom-up process by which initiatives involving research and innovation cooperation between Member States come into existence results in a European-level research portfolio which does not correspond sufficiently to those policy and regulatory functions which Member States have agreed should be determined at European level. This important deficiency risks undermining support for research at a European level (and could result in a lack of confidence in the EU’s research governance structures and competencies and their effectiveness). The Green Paper on the ERA had proposed that ERA should be strengthened by addressing fragmentation. An alternative (or complementary) approach is to regard research in Europe as a part of a wider ecosystem embracing innovation and other policy domains and the actors within them. In tandem with this conceptual switch is the notion that the type of integration, coordination and resources envisaged in the ERA concept is only likely to be achieved if actors (and policymakers) are motivated by engagement in a series of Grand Challenges and other mission-oriented projects. An essential prerequisite to the mobilisation of such a project is the formation of a common vision among key actors based upon a shared understanding of emerging trends and drivers of the sector, the mutual benefits of cooperation/coordination in policy approaches, resulting in a single commitment to joint implementation through the sharing of roles and responsibilities. (Final report, p. 3)
Aspects of RTI Governance: The changing nature of and demands on innovation require a re-thinking along new lines of the rationales for policy intervention in the light of the EU 2020 agenda. An incremental improvement and upgrading of conventional innovation policies will not do the job; current innovation policy is riddled with too many fundamental flaws and deficits. A major overhaul is needed of the governance structures and processes that are in place in the field of innovation policy. It is not only a question of how future innovation policy should look like, but also how to move towards a new organisational model for innovation policy. It should enable the realisation of a coherent policy approach and thus ensure that counterproductive effects of different policy areas are avoided and that innovation is paid due attention also in other policy areas than those that are dealing at their core with research and innovation. Moreover, it is crucial to establish a transparent and coherent division of labour between regional, national and European policy levels, as well as efficient cooperation between Member States, for instance on issues such as access to research funding or the engagement of national organisations across borders. (Final report, p. 16)
Background information: The project was a pilot study which developed and tested in real situations a foresight methodology designed to bring together key stakeholders to explore the longer term challenges which face their sector (or which cut across sectors) and to build a shared vision that could guide the development of the relevant European research agenda. This included identifying changes in the European Research and Innovation Ecosystem which would be needed to take forward that agenda. The target was not FP8 in isolation or the specific case of Joint Programming Initiatives but rather a means of embedding these as a core element of wider cooperation and coordination mechanisms/processes around the challenges facing the sectors examined. (Final report, p. 3)

Scenarios

Scenario 1: Agri-climate Success Scenario for 2050. The scene for the success scenario was set with reference to future historical events including a Second Great World Food Crisis in the early 2040s, in which Europeans will had have been forced to change their diet but where prescient actions taken to prepare the agricultural system from 2015 onwards will had have insulated the Continent from the worst effects of climate change. A review written in 2040 of the past 40 years, illustrated how two generations of researchers were able to engage with a series of challenges and bring with them Europe’s timely actions to provide important insights on how proactive, forward-looking approaches can be realised through joint transnational research initiatives. It referred to how farmers will have become increasingly used to facing the impacts of climate change reflecting the risks identified in the workshop. Elements of the foreseen policy approach included:
- European early warning and response strategy and facility
- Capitalising on existing knowledge. The success scenario also included a retrospective on policy which described a situation where societal challenges dominate the bulk of effort and resources in the European research and innovation ecosystem.
- Networked Specialisation (a trans-European network of institutions synthesizing a large pool of knowledge).

A research agenda for agriculture included:
- Energy adaptation based on a mix of approaches including reduction of transport in production and distribution, design of greenhouses that capture energy rather than use it, and break-throughs in bio-energy from trees alleviating stresses on land use.
- Fertilisers that use less material input (potassium and phosphate) and less energy in their production.
- New varieties of plants with a reduced need for fertilisers and new varieties of fertilisers from manure and nitrogen fixing in grasses. Opposition to genetically modified crops was dissipated by creating plants designed to be low risk (for example without the ability to spread pollen).
- Water use and drought resistance are critical factors particularly for Mediterranean regions. A multifaceted strategy includes the selection of plant varieties to conserve water and breeding of drought resistant varieties.
- Soil fertility and dynamics provide an important research theme. (Final report, pp 8-9)
Scenario 2: Teaching and Learning for an ICT Revolutionised Society. The workshop participants articulated a vision of a Europe where future generations possess an adequate repertoire of skills and competences to enable them to participate actively in a digital society, both in their personal and in their professional lives. European educational systems need to take advantage of improved learning mechanisms offered by ICT, and individuals must be able to manoeuvre safely in the virtual world whilst being creative and constructive contributors to society and to our economy. Europe must produce a cadre of workers who are able to leverage the power of ICT to enhance their productivity, to develop improved products and processes, and to reap social and economic benefits through the development of innovative solutions. (Final report, pp. 9-12)
Scenario 3: A success scenario framework for future innovation policy in Europe. Pillar 1: Issue-oriented innovation policy: Focus on Grand Challenges: Going beyond an integration of research and innovation policy and considering the integration of innovation agendas into sectoral policies, or Making innovation-friendliness a standard criterion for defining “good practice” regulations in sectoral policies. Pillar 2: Systemic innovation policy: dealing with systemic deficits: Adjusting state aid rules and other elements of competition policy in order to remove inherent barriers to innovation, Revisiting of public procurement practices and regulations to enable the full exploitation of their innovation-enhancing potential across borders and in the context of Structural Funds. Pillar 3: Orientation and rationales for innovation policy in Europe: providing vision and leadership for innovation to become a horizontal concern in a multi-level policy context: Establishing a culture and sensitivity for co-development practices in public administration to enable effective procurement procedures, including the fostering of training and information exchange about experiences and good practices in co-development. Developing and testing new types of consultation platforms and procedures in and around the EC institutions, in order to strengthen the coherence of new policy initiatives. Incentivizing experimentation and risk-taking in public administration at European level, for instance by alleviating provisions on personal financial liability for EC staff and by supporting a risk-tolerant and trust-based approach to managing innovation initiatives. (FInal report, pp. 17-19)
Actions/solutions implied: Teaching and Learning for an ICT Revolutionised Society. In order to achieve this vision, the following policy recommendations were put forward:
Crosscutting Policy Approach and Strong Education Initiative at EU Level. Educational System Needs to Embrace ICT Literacy as a Key Objective. Encourage Employers to Qualify the Workforce. Inclusive Policies for All Members of Society. (Final report, pp. 9-12) In the field of minerals Policy recommendations were summarised in terms of four necessary Key Actions:
- Key Action 1: Establish an integrated strategy for the area and support it with continuity of funding.
- Key Action 2: Move from Stop-Go to a lasting approach with three central aspects for a research, technology and innovation programme. There are three broad research priorities:mineral resources intelligence, new or better technologies, mitigation and understanding of environmental impacts. Adopt a holistic approach to the innovation cycle and a joint programming approach.
- Key Action 3: Increase the flow of trained people.
-Key Action 4: Governance issues are critical. The area goes beyond the competence and capability of individual Member States and is inherently European. (pp. 14-15)

Referring to European Innovation Policy, a total of sixteen principles or “commandments” of future innovation policy and its governance were formulated:
Ten principles of next-generation innovation policy
1. Orientate innovation policy towards Grand Challenges
2. Respond to the international embedding of innovation activities
3. Balance priorities by supporting efforts to achieve productivity gains and create new markets and jobs
4. Strengthen incentives to innovate, but avoid hampering spillover effects needed to ensure that Grand Challenges can be tackled
5. Make use of Grand Challenges as mechanisms for building new forms of social and commercial collaboration
6. Give priority to social and organisational innovation rather than research-led innovation only
7. Ensure that cross-cutting policies support the innovation agendas, and thus reflect the central role that has been assigned to innovation
8. Gear knowledge triangle policies towards innovation
9. Provide stronger innovation impulses through sectoral agendas and related demand-side policies
10. Intensify efforts to tackle remaining systemic innovation deficits

In addition to these principles of innovation policy, six additional principles were formulated that should guide the future governance of innovation policy in Europe. These principles, both in relation to policy and to governance, apply at European as well as at Member States level: Six principles of next-generation governance
• Innovation policy needs to be horizontally embedded and integrated
• Improve coherence in innovation policies at different policy levels
• Put emphasis on building institutions and rules rather than specific programmes
• Make Grand Challenges concrete and tangible as a precondition for setting policy priorities
• Enhance the responsiveness of innovation policy-making to new needs
• Ensure that public administration delivers more with less. (Final report, p. 17)
Who benefits from the actions taken?: N/A

Meta information

Time horizon: 2030
Methods: Conferences/Workshops; Expert Panels; Interviews; Literature Review; Role play/Gaming; Scanning; Scenario Vignettes; Scenario Workshops; Surveys; Weak Signals Analysis; Wild Cards Analysis; Bibliometrics; Impact Analysis;System dynamics/simulation; Cross-impact probability (SMIC); Data/Text mining; Key/Critical technologies; Polling/Voting; Roadmapping; Stakeholder Analysis/MACTOR
Target Group: Government departments or ministries; Government agencies; Parliament; Research funding organisations, e.g. research councils; Public research organisations (non-HEI); Private research and innovation support organisations; Higher education institutions (HEI); Large corporations / transnational companies (TNC); Associations representing commercial interests (trade bodies, chambers of commerce); European Commission; European Parliament; Other EU bodies/agencies; International organisations (OECD, UNESCO, UNIDO, etc.); civil society
Objectives: view of this rationale, the goals and objectives of FarHorizon were formulated as follows:
1. To pilot the use of foresight to align research with longer-term policy needs in Europe and to advance knowledge on:
a. Differences across policy domains in the European Research and Innovation Ecosystem (also further articulating this concept) in terms of the role and the integration of research agendas in long-term policies and vice-versa; and b. Appropriate foresight designs needed to get engagement and secure follow-up across policy domains/areas.
2. To produce immediately useful results by selecting areas and participants with a view to stimulating action.
3. To select four areas with different sectoral characteristics with the advice of an independent panel to ensure that the pilot covers a range of circumstances.
Countries covered: only EU in general
ERA actors/stakeholders mentioned: See target groups + lists of participants at the workshops are included at the end of the four main reports: 'Breakthrough technologies: For the security of supply of critical minerals and metals in the Au'; 'Teaching and learning for an ICT revolutionised society'; 'Dynamising innovation policy: Giving innovation a central role in European policy'; ' Foresighting the AgriClimate Ecology: Application of breakthrough technologies to
adaptation to climate change in agriculture';
Geographic scope:

Entry Details

Rapporteur: Effie Amanatidou
Rapporteur's organization: UNIMAN
Entry Date: 11.04.2012