FRANCE'S NEW SCIENTIFIC/INNOVATION SYSTEM

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 04 PARIS 007882 SIPDIS SIPDIS WHITEHOUSE FOR OSTP HHS FOR INTERNATIONAL AND PASS TO NIH STATE PASS NSF AND NASA STATE FOR OES/PCI (EISENSTAT),STAS, EB, EUR/WE USDOC FOR NIST USEU FOR SMITHAM EMBASSIES FOR ESTH OFFICERS E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: TSPL PGOV FR SUBJECT: FRANCE'S NEW SCIENTIFIC/INNOVATION SYSTEM REF: 05 PARIS 7023 and previous PARIS 00007882 001.2 OF 004 NOT FOR INTERNET DISTRIBUTION. ¶1. Summary: In the past two years France has undertaken remarkable reforms in its scientific/innovation system. These include the creation of a High Council for Science and Technology, a National Research Agency, and numerous 'competitiveness clusters,' among other structures. The government has also boosted resources for scientific research. At the applied end of these reforms, the GOF has created and funded an Industrial Innovation Agency. While this new structure is now in place, and is mostly welcomed by the French research and business community, analysts assert the transformation is on-going. More needs to be done to assure it makes change permanent in France's traditional, government-driven, 'dirigiste' scientific/innovation system. End Summary. -------------- What was... -------------- ¶2. Traditionally, the lion's share of scientific research in France has been done by government research/technical agencies staffed with civil servants. The largest of these is the National Center for Scientific Research (CNRS) with a budget of around 2.5 billion euros and a staff of 26,000 researchers, engineers, and technical and administrative staff. Similar agencies include INSERM, responsible for biomedical research, France's Atomic Energy Commission (CEA), and the National Center for Space Studies (CNES). There are a total of more than thirty of these scientific/technical agencies in France. Many have performed outstanding science and continue to do so. Others have been criticized as containing overlapping missions; non-homogeneous modes of management, funding, and evaluation; a civil servant status for public researchers with limited incentives or benefits; and a lack of strategic vision at the government level. Moreover, the scattering of funding resources at the regional, national, and EU levels made bidding for funding unnecessarily complex. Realigning the roles of the university sector, including the 'Grandes Ecoles,' and that of public research establishments, like CNRS, in conducting research has also been a matter of concern. 
 -------------- From labs to streets... -------------- ¶3. In spring 2004, French researchers took to the streets to express their grievances that the scientific sector was neither receiving the attention, nor the funding, it deserved. In response to those concerns and bearing in mind the Lisbon strategy, which calls for three percent of an EU member's GDP be dedicated to R&D by 2010, the GOF initiated major reforms. The government's idea was not only to introduce new mechanisms, but also stimulate existing scientific entities. -------------- Bold steps... -------------- ¶4. Adopted in April 2006, the long-awaited Research and Innovation Bill (RIB) - while not eliminating scientific/technical agencies - aims to bring flexibility to France's overly centralized and bureaucratic system, reinforcing science-industry relations, and promoting greater strategic direction. The new system would attempt to inculcate competition for government research funding and embrace the university system. Private enterprise would benefit from more flexible working arrangements with government scientists, as well as by receiving R&D tax incentives themselves. The GOF partly anticipated the RIB and began implementing the new structures provided for in it in early 2006. -------------- 'Pact for Research' -------------- ¶5. The RIB adopted in April 2006 and the Pact for Research announced by the Villepin government reinforce the GOF's ability to direct national research policy both in terms of strategic PARIS 00007882 002.2 OF 004 orientations and evaluation. The pact notably aims at promoting: -- A new approach to funding (based on scientific appeal of projects); -- Merit-based selection and increased competitiveness among research teams; -- An enhanced role of the private sector in research; including cross fertilization between public and private research; -- Greater focus on international attractiveness (university sector); -- New incentives to attract - or retain - junior researchers; -- Financial incentives for 'young innovative companies.' -------------- New tools/structures -------------- ¶6. The RIB ratifies the establishment of new structures and mechanisms rolled out by the GOF in 2005 and early 2006. These new structures were accompanied by an internal reorganization within the Research and Higher Education Ministry where the research and technology directorates merged into a single directorate for research and innovation. The new directorate is responsible for defining the Ministry's scientific policy. The merge was presented as a means to eliminate artificial boundaries between basic and applied research and to facilitate technology transfer. -------------- High Council for Science & Technology -------------- ¶7. A High Council for Science and Technology, composed of 20 distinguished citizens (not necessarily scientists),was installed by President Chirac in September 2006. Its purpose is to guide the GOF in prioritizing national research. It also is designed to ensure coherence with objectives within the so-called European Research Area. Themes which the Council has already been tasked to explore include: energy and the environment, and the crisis in science as a vocation. -------------- National Research Agency -------------- ¶8. The National Research Agency (NRA) aspires to embody characteristics of the U.S. National Science Foundation. The law creating it stipulates that a significant portion of its funding will be allocated to GOF thematic priority projects. There is scope for consideration of projects in 'non-priority' areas of research, but they require justification. The NRA's 2006 budget amounted to 590 millions euros. The proposed 2007 budget is 40 percent above that of 2006. -------------- Inchoate Evaluation Agency... -------------- ¶9. The RIB law provides for systematic, unified, and transparent evaluation of research conducted both in universities and public agencies. The decree providing for the creation of a new National Agency for the Evaluation of Research and Higher Education (NAERHE) was finally signed in November 2006 despite resistance by elements of the science community and the researchers' unions. The latter wished to maintain the former system wherein each research establishment evaluated its own research. The NAERHE will reportedly be responsible for the evaluation of all public research, including that of the NRA. One-third of the evaluation committee members will come from the private research sector. Indirectly, the NAERHE is expected to play a significant role in the allocation of public funding to research agencies. According to GOF officials, however, implementation of the new evaluation structure, which constitutes a key element in the overhaul of the French research system, will prove "difficult" before the elections. -------------- Coordinating Research and Higher Education -------------- PARIS 00007882 003.2 OF 004 ¶10. The higher education sector in France includes 84 universities in 153 geographical locations engaged in a variety of fields. There are an additional 80 higher educational institutions, including 'Grandes Ecoles' (elite schools),with only some of them engaged actively in 'research.' The GOF spends considerably more money (per student) on the elite schools than on universities. (Student cost in France per university year approximates 6700 euros.) Due to this historic division of higher education in France, higher education "poles" or clusters remain too small to be 'visible' at the international level. (According to a recent evaluation of universities worldwide, the highest-ranked French university came in at 46th place.) The RIB encourages higher education and research establishments to achieve critical size by pooling activities and means to create strategic, geographical clusters. ¶11. Two types of cooperation are proposed: Research and Higher Education Hubs (RHEH) and Advanced Research Thematic Foundations (ARTF). The RHEH concept is a 'bottom up' one, providing universities and public research establishments an opportunity to gather around common research themes at a regional level. According to recent reports, government universities plan to pool themselves into nine RHEH's (in French 'Poles de Recherches et Renseignements Superieurs') by middle 2007. ARTFs aim to bring together a critical mass of high level researchers from the university, public agencies, and private sector, to conduct projects of excellence in a specific area and facilitate the emergence of internationally recognized scientific centers. ¶12. ARTFs are reportedly well under way. Among the 13 foundations which have been selected (October 2006),six ARTFs are deemed to be internationally competitive: Lyon area/infectious diseases; Strasbourg/chemistry; Toulouse/aeronautics; Montpellier/agronomic research; Paris/neurosciences; Grenoble/micro- and nanotech. Some 6000 researchers are involved in the ARTF. The GOF has thus managed, in less than six months after the passage of the legislation, to implement one of the main structural features of the new Pact for Research. The 13 ARTFs benefit from certain tax exemptions and employment law exemptions to facilitate short-term secondments between companies and research clusters and the hiring of foreign researchers. Advice and assistance regarding access to technology and market analysis is provided to ARTFs by the government and ARTFs have been granted the status of foundations, enabling them to raise extra funding. -------------- 'Competitiveness Clusters' -------------- ¶13. Competitiveness clusters are designed to spark growth of industrial activities and jobs and to strengthen regional economic vitality. The main players are enterprises, research entities, and higher education institutions. One-third of the earmarked budget or 1.5 billion euros over the period 2005-2007 has already allocated to implement the the competitiveness cluster system. Competitiveness clusters are not only intended for emerging technologies but also for more conventional fields, as well as more mature sectors (e.g. automotive and aviation industries and health). After one year, 66 such clusters have been established in France. The top ("world class") six poles are in the agro food sector, ICT, manufacturing, transport biotech and energy. 40 percent of private sector beneficiaries are reportedly SMEs. While initial evaluation of this mechanism - notably by the OECD - appears positive, some analysts caution against too much reliance on state-led initiatives and deplore that the number of selected clusters might dilute the "priming effect" of the limited amount of state subsidies. -------------- New Industrial Innovation Agency, too! -------------- ¶14. The aim of the Industrial Innovation Agency (IIA),which was established in August 2005, is the promotion and support of innovative industrial programs. Its cumulative budget for the 2005-2007 period amounts to the not inconsiderable sum of two billion euros for large scale industrial programs involving key technologies. These funds are to be distributed in the form of grants or reimbursable loans. Projects cover molecular imagery, biomass exploitation, energy efficiency in buildings, a new light PARIS 00007882 004.2 OF 004 rail system, the French/German multimedia search engine Quaero, and a mobile TV project. The Agency also has a mandate to provide support to innovative SMEs. ¶15. Comment: While it is too soon to evaluate the importance and benefits of new structures and tools, many consider the new structures encourage financial commitments for research and relieve administrative burden for scientists to access funding. Analysts also note positively measures in favor of start-ups and young firms and the effort towards the modernization of evaluation procedures. But many structures and procedures continue to coexist with the newer entities creating sometimes bewildering complexity. The number of competition-based programs and the opacity of grant decision mechanisms have been increased with sometimes disconcerting impacts for researchers. Some critics note that despite the new funding mechanisms, the GOF continues to fund blue-ribbon companies rather than project proposals based on their merit. Nor did the university sector receive a thoroughgoing shake-up as part of these reforms: No real effort has been made to redefine the role and responsibilities of universities in R&D strategy and the degree of autonomy to be granted to university research. ¶16. However, considering the hyper-sensitivity of researchers' unions and the French science community to change, a complete remake of France's research system was always unlikely. French government contacts are hopeful that the newly introduced structures are here to stay; that the April elections in France will not create the conditions for rollback of new structures provided for in the RIB. ¶17. Finally, the Science Section in the French Embassy in Washington - supported by a variety of French science agencies - is organizing a 'Franco-American Competitiveness Clusters' conference in Toulouse, February 5-6, to permit representatives of French clusters to meet U.S. counterparts. Expect to hear more about these new French science and innovation structures in the future. HOFMANN