|
|
15 September 1992
Doc. 6660
1403-14/9/92-3-E
O P I N I O N
on the work of OECD in the field of science
and technology in 19911
(Rapporteur: Mr ROSETA, Portugal, Soc. Dem.)
______
Introduction
1. Once again, the Committee on Science and Technology has been asked for its opinion on the work of the OECD in the fields of science, technology and energy policy. Although the Parliamentary Assembly debate hinges on the agency's work over the previous year, that is 1991, it also provides an opportunity to record parliamentarians' views on the organisation's present and future tasks.
2. The debate also gives the Committee on Science and Technology the opportunity to review its own programme in the light of the most recent analyses of the problems facing our governments, either among themselves or vis-à-vis the governments of other industrialised nations or in their relations with other parts of the world. Our committee follows the work of the OECD Committees for Scientific and Technological Policy and for Information, Computer and Communications Policy and also that of the International Energy Agency and OECD's Nuclear Energy Agency.
3. Every year, the Committee on Science and Technology selects a number of major themes among the vast range of OECD's activities in the fields of science and technology on which to base its opinion. Last year, after a brief survey of the programme of the OECD's Committee for Scientific and Technological Policy, our Rapporteur focused on the Technology/Economy Programme (TEP), East-West scientific and technological relations and the committee's next meeting at ministerial level. The themes selected in 1990 were energy (energy supply, -renewable sources of energy, nuclear energy), technology transfer and technology assessment. Other recent opinions given by the committee have covered the impact of science and technology on economic growth, research, biotechnology and telecommunications.
4. Last year the Committee on Science and Technology joined the Committee on Economic Affairs and Development in regretting the failure to modify the form of the Assembly debate on OECD activities as planned. This modification has now been made and this year, for the first time, parliamentary delegations from Australia, Canada, the United States, Japan and New Zealand will be able to take part in the proceedings with exactly the same rights as the delegations from Council of Europe member states. The European Parliament will also attend as an observer and be able to present amendments. It is to be hoped that this change will revive interest among parliamentarians and the public.
The meeting of Ministers responsible for Science and Technology2
5. The OECD Committee for Scientific and Technological Policy met at ministerial level in Paris on 10 and 11 March 1992. The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe was invited to attend as an observer, as had been the case at the previous meeting in 1987. The Chairman of our committee and I followed this meeting with interest. It was also attended, for the first time, by the Ministers responsible for Scientific and Technological Policy of Hungary, Poland, the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic Republic and the Russian Federation.
6. The general theme for the meeting, "Science and Technology Policies in the 1990s - the Interrelatedness of the National and International Dimensions", reflected the growing impact of the intensified and multi-faceted internationalisation of economies as well as of science and technology systems. The Ministers focused their discussion on three main sets of questions: international co-operation in big science; the development of co-operation with Central and East European countries; and national innovation systems and international interdependence.
7. The chief conclusion of the meeting was the Ministers' agreement on the need for reinforced and enlarged international scientific and technological co-operation as a consequence of the internationalisation process. The Ministers believed that, in addition to its direct benefits for scientific and technological progress, co-operation helped reduce disparities between countries. The Committee on Science and Technology welcomes this conclusion. Our committee has always encouraged greater international co-operation in science and technology, seeing it as a means of reducing disparities in economic and technical development not only between OECD member states and the developing countries of the South or the transition economies of Central and Eastern Europe but also within the OECD zone itself.
8. The upheavals in Eastern Europe have rather turned our attention away from the problems of the developing countries. But world peace demands world economic stability. Today, more than ever, technology transfer must be given a major role in exchanges between industrialised and developing countries. The economic survival of the latter and also migration phenomena hinge largely on the reduction of imbalances in technology and trade. Furthermore, it would be normal to expect that, with the cold war over, a new international solidarity would be expressed in the form of peace dividends. The committee is therefore urging the OECD to increase scientific and technological co-operation with the developing countries in order to reduce economic disparities.
Co-operation in big science
9. The world is changing at an ever-quickening pace as are patterns of behaviour. Technologies are evolving and becoming interdependent. There is an internationalisation of research and a growing trend towards big science projects (major facilities or world-wide research) which are so expensive that even the richest nations have difficulty in financing them. Some of these projects even exceed the funding capacity of regional organisations such as the European Community and can only be carried out on a world-wide scale. The OECD could play an important role in promoting this kind of co-operation while avoiding duplication. While these major international co-operation projects entail benefits, there are now so many of them involving such a high level of human and financial resources that for many countries the decision to participate presents difficult problems of resource allocation and choice of priorities. The Committee on Science and Technology recently expressed its views on this type of co-operation with regard to European space policy (see Doc. 6549, Rapporteurs: MM. Fourré and Lenzer).
10. In this context, the Ministers of OECD member states agreed that there was an urgent need for a process for the exchange of information and for open, substantive discussion between the governments of member countries at an early formative stage on the planning, development and financing of big science projects and large-scale programmes. This is another source of satisfaction for our committee which, already five years ago, recommended that the Committee of Ministers "take measures ... to enable the governments concerned to hold occasional exchanges of views on the probable evolution of their international scientific and technological commitments ..., whether these be at European level, or in other international frameworks ..." (see Recommendation 1063 (1987) and the report on European scientific and technological co-operation, Doc. 5784, Rapporteur: Mr Bassinet).
Co-operation with Central and East European countries
11. On the subject of Central and East European countries, the Ministers welcomed the progress made in their transition towards market-based economies. The capacity to generate and assimilate scientific advances and technological innovation had to be an integral part of the economic reform process. It was therefore of vital importance to safeguard the science and research bases of these countries and, in particular, their human resources. Technology transfer and the future of the scientific and technical potential of Central and East European countries have been discussed by our committee on numerous occasions, notably with Mr Curien, the French Minister for Science.
12. The Committee on Science and Technology urges the OECD to continue providing assistance to the new democracies of Central and Eastern Europe, particularly in the four vital areas defined by the ministers: the training of scientists and engineers; strengthening of national science and technology systems; the process of technology transfer; and the conversion of military industry. In the latter area, it would be necessary to ensure that the reduction in military research is counterbalanced by a corresponding increase in the civil sector.
13. Our committee has just organised a hearing, in conjunction with the International Atomic Energy Agency, on nuclear power plants in Eastern Europe (Budapest, 1 July 1992) and is now preparing a report on the subject (Rapporteur: Mr Bassinet). This is an area where the experience and expertise of the OECD's Nuclear Energy Agency would certainly prove most useful.
Assessing scientific and technological options
14. This theme is still central among the concerns of our committee (it is safe to say that, in a way, our entire work constitutes a kind of technological assessment). Parliaments, governments, scientists and industrialists are les and less certain as to where progress is leading us. Yet governments and parliaments have to take decisions, make choices and deal with issues linked to technologies whose full implications they are not always capable of grasping. It is vital that they are provided with suitable structures for assessing the potential consequences of the available options. Their choices must also take public perception of technological risks into account, as was made clear by the colloquy organised by our Sub-Committee on Technology Policy (Locarno, 25-26 May 1992) and the report on this topic by
Mr Birraux (See Doc. 6663).
15. Two years ago we welcomed the holding of a symposium in Vienna on technology indicators, organised by the OECD within the framework of its Technology/Economy Programme (TEP) and we hoped for closer co-operation between the OECD and those for whom technology was becoming an increasingly essential working tool: the parliamentarians of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe and more particularly the Committee on Science and Technology (see Doc. 6299). Last year we stated that "the work done by OECD in the field of technology assessment could prove very useful for our committee" (see Doc. 6485). Today it is our view that parliamentarians do not yet fully benefit from this work, and I hope that our committee will soon find, in conjunction with the OECD, a working method that will breach this gap.
Final remarks
16. In last year's opinion, our committee expressed the view that it should review its relationship with OECD and its participation in the annual debate on its activities. Some of the OECD's activities were on the obscure side as far as parliamentarians were concerned, and the committee believed that they could be made better known. The OECD representatives who met the committee in May 1991 had said that the question of dissemination of available data was under review. Unfortunately, we were unable to meet OECD representatives this year, but the question is still on the agenda.
17. In the light of the points mentioned above, the Committee on Science and Technology will consider the possibility of presenting amendments to the draft resolution of the Committee on Economic Affairs and Development.
*
* *
Reporting committee: Committee on Economic Affairs and Development (Doc. 6651).
Committee for opinion: Committee on Science and Technology (and competent committees).
Reference to committee: Doc. 6624 and Reference No. 1792 of
30 June 1992.
Opinion: approved by the committee on 8 September 1992.
2 2 The following paragraphs are based on the "Communiqué of the meeting at ministerial level of the OECD Committee for Scientific and Technological Policy" [SG PRESS (92) 21].