london

Research ministers from member states of the European Union (EU) have been asked to consider a set of measures proposed this week by the European Commission in Brussels to improve the effectiveness with which research programmes are managed.

One of the commission's suggestions — drafted in response to pressure from EU member states for a more imaginative and innovative approach to research management — is a regular ‘benchmarking’ exercise comparing its performance against that of other research organizations.

The ministers also want those actively engaged in research to be more involved in setting up research programmes. And the commission is proposing a pilot experiment on how the management of grants aimed to increase the mobility of research workers in Europe might be devolved from Brussels, giving more autonomy to host institutions.

Cresson: accepting pressure for change Credit: CE

The proposals were submitted on Tuesday 28 April by Edith Cresson, the commissioner responsible for research and education, to a colloquium in London attended by more than half of the 15 EU research ministers.

Although hosted by the British government — which holds the chair of the Council of Ministers — the meeting was held primarily at the suggestion of Claude Allègre, the French minister for research, technology and education.

It reflected a feeling that, now that the budget of the Fifth five-year Framework research programme (FP5) has been approved (see Nature 391, 729; 1998), the time is ripe to turn a more critical eye on how effectively the programme is managed.

Allègre, for example, has suggested ways in which responsibility for day-to-day management might be devolved away from Brussels to organizations in member states. Other changes in the organization of European-level research have been discussed among the heads of the research councils of EU member states, who meet regularly as the group known as Eurohorcs.

The day before the London meeting, Eurohorc representatives met European Science Foundation (ESF) officials in Strasbourg to discuss how the two bodies might work together to advise the commission on the use of EU research funds.

No decisions were taken at the meeting. It was agreed, however, that the ESF (whose members also include non-EU states) would explore how such closer collaboration might work in practice; for example, whether it should set up a small secretariat for Eurohorcs in its Strasbourg offices.

Brussels officials are said to be watching such developments closely, aware both of the scope for more effective management of individual programmes through devolution, but also of the danger of diluting the ‘added value’ which, they argue, comes from operating through the commission. Some are also said to be concerned that devolution might reduce their own authority.

Battle: keen to see greater user input Credit: KEITH DOBREY

Prior to Tuesday's meeting, John Battle, Britain's science minister, said that the ECU14 billion ($15.5 billion) for FP5 represented “a huge amount of money which must be managed carefully and transparently”.

Some of the ideas being discussed reflect the general approach to research management that the British government is keen to see adopted in Brussels.

The idea of ‘benchmarking’ performance by comparing it with that in other countries, for example, has attracted a strong following both in the Office of Science and Technology and in university funding councils.

Indeed, the commission itself has already responded to such interest by emphasizing, in a statement issued on Monday, that a recent study by Andersen Consulting shows that its administrative costs “compare favourably [original emphasis] with those of other European and national research organizations”.

Following Tuesday's meeting, the commission will put forward proposals on how it intends to respond to the ministers' demands for more effective management of research funds at the next formal meeting of the EU research council in Brussels on 22 June.