Pergamon Prog. Polym. Sei., Vol. 19, 1045 1048, 1994

((23 1994 Elsevier Science Ltd Printed in Great Britain. All rights reserved.

0079 6700/94 $26.00

0079-6700(94)00016-6

S C I E N C E P O L I C Y O F A S M A L L C O U N T R Y I N T H E E U R O P E A N C O N T E X T *

KuRx L. KOMAREK

University of Vienna, Austria

Austria is a country of 7.5 million people - a lightweight among the leading scientific powers of Europe like Germany, France, and the U.K. However, even compared to smaller countries like Switzerland, Holland, and Sweden it takes a back- seat when considering annual expenditures for R & D (research and development). For the countries mentioned R & D is about 2.3-3.0% of the GNP (gross national pro- duct). Austria's budget for R & D barely reached 1.5% of its GNP (the average for the EC countries is 2.1%).

In Austria about 50% of R & D is due to expenditures by industry (US$1.5 billion), and 50% is contributed by the federal and - to a much smaller extent - by state governments (US$1.3 billion). Austria has no multinational companies, by inter- national standards. Companies are small or medium in size, and all universities are federal, i.e., money for running the universities comes from the federal government - from the Finance Ministry via the Ministry of Science and Research. Besides teaching colleges, the universities function as the Austrian institutions concerned with basic research. To a much smaller extent basic research is also carried out in the institutes of the Austrian Academy of Sciences.

To promote basic research 25 years ago the Austrian Science Foundat ion (FWF, Fonds zur F6rderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung) was created together with a foundation to foster applied research in small and medium sized companies (FFF, F6rderungsfonds ftir die Gewerbliche Wirtschaft). The annual budget of the Austrian Science Foundat ion has now reached about US$50 million - for a comparison with the U.S.A. you have to multiply this sum by 30 to get US$1.5 billion - not too different from the budget of its sister organization, the NSF. However, FWF is also funding medical and biomedical research, Austria has no private foundations which sponsor basic research, and Austria - like the rest of Europe - has regrettably no NIH. About 80% of the budget of FWF goes to research scientists at universities for individual research projects, cooperative research priorities (interdisciplinary, interu- niversitary projects of groups of scientists), international cooperations, and scholar- ships (stipends) for young scientists. Reviewing of project proposals is based on the peer review system with most reviewers from countries other than Austria. The opera- tive mode of FWF is autonomous and is remarkably free of any political and bureau- cratic interference.

Research policy of a small country like Austria - and I am focussing on basic research - has to fulfill a variety of tasks, and has to face various problems including:

*Presented at the symposium entitled Polymer Science and Technology in the 21st Century, New York, November 8-10, 1992.

1045

1046 K.L. KOMAREK

(1) maintaining and improving scientific potential - and in the long run economic competitiveness;

(2) finding scientific niches, setting priorities, and fostering cooperation between scientists;

(3) stimulating and promoting international cooperation; (4) observing national specifities and contributing to the cultural and national identity

of our country; and (5) promoting the education and training of our young scientists.

At the national level, the situation for basic research in Austria has steadily improved over the past twenty years. Research money is still in short supply, but by and large the university laboratories are well equipped with modern instruments, and the budget of the Ministry of Science and Research has been increasing annually by 10-12%, way above the level of inflation (4%). Salaries for scientists - although not as high as in Switzerland - are higher than in the U.K., and the mobility of students and faculties has been on the increase. For young scientists FWF is offering Schrr- dinger scholarships which allow Austrian post-docs to spend - adequately financed - one to two years at a foreign scientific institute to bring back to Austria acquired know-how. About 50% of our students are choosing a US university or institute, and more than 95% have returned to Austria. For the reverse scientific traffic, Lise Meitner scholarships are now doing the same for foreign post-docs who would like to spend some time at an Austrian university.

As in other countries, the role of women in science has recently been given increased attention. Only 3% of university professors are female, and with a retirement wave envisaged in the next decade, concerns about qualified replacements is high on our agenda.

For a small country like Austria, we have to look across our borders, especially now when many countries are moving together economically and - with some hesitation - politically. Collaboration in "Big Science" was always necessary, and has worked very well in the past. A prime example of a very effective European scientific cooperation is C E R N near Geneva (Conseil European pour la Recherche Nucleaire) in high-energy physics whose first director, Viktor Weisskopf, was also an involuntary gift of Austria to the U.S.A.

The Europeanization of science requires a transnational cooperation in "Small Science" at the project level. To American eyes, European science might appear as a crazy quilt of national programs as if each state in the U.S.A. had its own science foundation or research council with its own specific rules and regulations. Such an over simplified view entirely misses the point of the national - even linguistic - diversities that are nonexistent in the U.S.A.

The first place to look for funding for research at a European level is the European Communi ty (EC) in Brussels, and at the Directorate General for Science, Research, and Development (DGXII). Although Austria is not yet a member of the EC, it can - with some provisions and under certain conditions - take part in the programs: BRIDGE, biotechnology; ESPRIT, information technology; JET, fusion research; COST, materials technology; EURAM, EUREKA; SCIENCE, the only one aimed at basic research. Money available through DGXII has grown over the years (First Framework Program 1984-1987 US$5 billion, Third Framework Program 1990- 1994 US$8 billion) - it now stands at US$2 billion annually, and so has its bureau- cracy - the director Fasella has now about 2000 bureaucrats. Since the EC countries

SCIENCE POLICY OF A SMALL COUNTRY 1047

contribute to a common pot, they ask their scientists to participate in these various projects to get their fair share of the pot - preferably even a larger piece if possible.

The problem as far as basic science is concerned rests in the character of the EC. The EC is primarily an economic association and its main goal is to improve European (EC) industrial competitiveness. This often results in a contradictory relationship between basic and applied research, i.e., it invariably leads to a preference for applied research. The EC also has regional, structural, and distributional goals in spending the funds, and scientific standards and the objective evaluation of proposals are not always of primary concern. The EC bureaucracy is highly developed and organized, demo- cratic control is underdeveloped and the national research organisations as "consu- mers" are in a defensive position - and are also very differently organized (various degrees of autonomy with respect to their governments). In addition, for a small country like Austria, its voice in decision making will be very feeble. It will be allowed to take part in research projects but will have very little say in determining research priorities and directions.

Basic research is closely connected with the training of young scientists in each national educational system. Basic research also plays an important role in the pre- servation of the cultural and national identity of a country. Since basic research can and has to respond to the specifities of the scientific community of a country, the promotion and funding of basic research has to be primarily sponsored and funded at the national level, be it by private foundations or by the government. Basic science must be free, and science policy is most successful if it encourages personal initiative - since progress in basic science is always a very individual process (H. Riesenhuber, Minister for Research and Technology, FRG, Science publication Affairs 5(1) 31-43 (1990)).

This "Give-them-money-and-let-them-work" or 'bottom-up" approach to trans- national cooperation in basic research is the basic principle of the European Science Foundation (ESF) with 59 participating research councils and academies from 21 countries (Austria being represented by the Austrian Academy of Sciences and the Austrian Science Foundation). It is operated by and for scientists, has many good ideas but not much money (annual budget US$5.5 million, cash flow US$10 million). The guiding principle is subsidiary (delegation of competencies to the level best suited for execution or decision making), i.e., only such problems and proposals will be considered which cannot be solved at the national level, which are truly trans- national. Cooperation proceeds in so-called networks funded through the regular budget (6-7 new networks per year for three years with a surprisingly low budget of US$150 000 per network),/~ la carte programs funded through additional contribu- tions, and Euroconferences (about 40 annually), similar to the Gordon Research Conferences in the U.S.A.

The ESF has been widely acclaimed by European scientists for successful organiza- tion of transnational cooperation in basic research with very modest means. Whether it will ever grow into a full-scale research council for Europe, as some supporters hope, is doubtful since it does not have the political support necessary to persuade Brussels to part with some of its money.

Research cooperation of Austrian scientists with partners in other countries is not restricted to Europe. The Austrian Science Foundation has signed Memoranda of Understanding, for example, with the Research Council in Israel, and with the NSF and NIH in the U.S.A. An evaluation at the NSF of its bilateral cooperations in

1048 K.L. KOMAREK

Europe has placed Austria in second place as far as quality is concerned (after France), and in second place regarding the number of projects (after Germany).

Small as it is, Austria has succeeded in the past to bring forth scientists who have made substantial contributions to science although, in many instances, not at home but abroad as expatriates. A case in point is polymer science and the contributions of Herman Mark, and in his footsteps Otto Vogl. I hope that in the future Austria's science policy will be equally successful.

Let me address a few personal words to our friend who is celebrating his 65th birthday: Dear Otto, it is my great pleasure to express my very best personal wishes to you on this joyous occasion, together with my wishes for many happy returns. I am also entrusted by the Board of Directors of the Christian Doppler Society, of whose International Advisory Council you are a member, to convey its best wishes in grateful recognition for your advice and contributions.