Brussels, 13/12/2011 (Agence Europe) - To illustrate to what extent European research and innovation policy is determining when it comes to European integration, a European Commission (DG Research and Innovation) study combines several scenarios illustrating what the EU could look like in 2050 according to the importance granted to this policy.
Presented during a conference in Brussels on 28 November, the report entitled “Global EUROPE 2050” sets out three very different scenarios to show what the EU might look like in 2050, depending on today's choices and on the consequences of the sovereign debt crisis. A broad range of criteria have been used, taking not only development within the EU but also that of the outside world into account. Experts worked on the study for a whole year covering a range of matters from demographic changes to energy resources, from the geopolitical framework to that of governance, and including macro-economic variables. They drew up three scenarios illustrating possible trajectories of European integration, for which EU research and innovation policy is a determining factor.
Scenario 1: “Nobody cares”. In this scenario, European policy on research and innovation remains unchanged, with investment being marginal compared to the means deployed at national level and European funds being mainly used for increasing the individual ranking of member states. In such a case, the Union of innovation would remain a largely ineffective process as it would come up against the interests of member states and the lack of resolve needed to increase the harmonisation of policies in this field. A two-player game is thus born, with, on one hand, the Commission seeking to promote its initiatives and, on the other, the states promoting bilateral external relations. The result of such a scenario would be the gradual weakening of the EU.
Scenario 2: “EU under threats … chacun pour soi” (every man for himself). Under the sign of disillusionment, due to the over-large fragmentation and unequal concentration of profits from investment in research and innovation, member states would gradually give up programmes such as Horizon 2020, judging that the European approach is too complex, too costly, too bureaucratic and finally somewhat ineffective. The failure to work in common on key questions relating to society (climate change, pandemics, food supply insecurity) would therefore cause duplication in the means devoted to research, increased competition between member states and finally a North-South division and a return to national protectionism.
Scenario 3: “An EU Renaissance”. One of the consequences of the sovereign debt crisis could be greater coordination and integration on the EU's economic and political front. In this scenario, the EU would gain fresh momentum through a new phase of economic integration engendered from integration of public procurement, among other things. The best national examples would guide the rest, with the creation of dense networks in order to coordinate the different research programmes in a vast number of areas. “The EU manages to optimally design its technological and research policies, to target the right domains and methods, and this leads to an acceleration in the pace of innovation and productivity gains increase progressively until 2050”, the report indicates. Such a scenario above all presupposes the adoption of a new treaty and financial alignment between private and public funding for research.
In order to give a quantitative illustration of the different scenarios, the point of departure is set at the year 2010, when the place of the EU in the “redistribution of economic power” stands on one hand at 29% of world GDP, whereas it is 26% for the United States, 9% for Japan and 8% for China. However, attention should not necessarily be focused on this share of the cake in 2050 (the EU's share will at best be 17% and at worst 15%), but rather the net increase of GDP, which shows a difference of up to 30% between scenarios two and three. In the same way, “EU Renaissance” implies for the rest of the world, and especially for India and the states of sub-Saharan Africa, high economic growth, which would result in reduction of poverty. Nonetheless, the limits of growth geared purely to research and innovation appear in the forecasts of CO2 emissions. Technology could thus be just one tool among others, as the most desirable scenario (Renaissance) is not that which brings about the greatest reduction in the level of emissions. An appropriate approach should also include policies that aim at the supply and scarcity of resources.
By way of conclusion, the European sovereign debt crisis is considered by the authors of the report as a major event that “could well represent a turning point in European integration”. The importance of investment in research and innovation is perhaps best illustrated by the fact that the authors consider the EU Renaissance scenario as that which corresponds the least to current tendencies.
A more complete summary of the study and further information can be found at: http://ec.europa.eu/research/social-sciences/events-191_en.html . (JK/transl.jl)