Statsråd Kristin Clemet
Innledning på Norges forskningsråds konferanse 16. juni 2004

”Science in a new situation: the role of basic research”

Distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen

The topic of this conference is an important one, not only to Norway but to the international research community as a whole. I am therefore very pleased to participate in this event and to see that so many of you are present to discuss and reflect on future aspects of the role of basic research. In the event that the Irish deputy prime minister Mary Harney was unable to attend this conference, I am very pleased that the Secretary General from the Irish Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment, Paul Haran, is here to share with us your views on European policy for basic research.

I would like to thank the Research Council of Norway for arranging this conferenc, and a special thank you goes to the key note speakers for participating and for making their valuable contributions.

The title of the conference implies a new situation for science in general and for basic research in particular. I think that is true. Mind you, the concept of basic research has been shifting through history. From the exclusive definition as pursuit of knowledge for its own sake, through the linear model and to more recent theories where basic research appears to be an important, but not necessarily the first, step in the innovation process.

The great challenge today is that basic research has become relevant in new areas without loosing its "traditional" roles and obligations. Pure search for knowledge still is and should be an important part of any civilized society. Basic research is still vital as a basis for higher education. It still provides knowledge which may lead to industrial innovations. One thing that seems to be new is that basic research to a larger extent leads directly to industrial innovations. This seems particularly to be the case within new areas such as biotechnology and nanotechnology.

I find it striking to note that even hard-core economists seem to stress the importance of high quality basic research when they are asked to identify the important determinants of economic growth. For a scientist, I suppose this is both flattering and frightening. It is flattering when what you do is considered vital to future growth and welfare. But it is frightening if this should imply that all basic research should be directed towards economic growth.

In my opinion it is important to overcome the traditional dichotomy between pure search for knowledge and industrial relevance. High quality research is very often relevant to both society and industry, even though the motivation is mainly academic.

I am confident that the conference will increase our awareness of the various dimensions of basic research and I am looking forward to receiving the main conclusions as part of the Council’s input to the next White Paper on Norwegian research policy which I am preparing for Parliament.

The Government has the ambition that Norway should be in the forefront in terms of knowledge, expertise and new technology. We want to reach this goal. Today Norwegian investment in research measured as a proportion of GNP (gross national product) lies significantly below the average of the OECD area. We have a low level of industrial research as compared to international standards, due to the dominance of raw materials oriented industries. Our educational level is high. As a small country, Norwegian research activities comprise only 0,4 (zero point four) percent of the research carried out globally.

This means that our potential probably lies in being excellent in a few selected areas and not on a broad scale. Our policy should therefore include a sharp priority setting. A main priority in the previous White Paper on research – presented in 1999 – was the strengthening of long-term basic research of high quality. In addition, four national thematic areas were chosen for increased research commitment in the use of public funds:

• marine research
• information and communication technology
• medical and health research
• research in the area of intersection between energy and the environment.

Since then, also functional genomics and materials technology are receiving extra funding. A central message in the White Paper was that quality in research must be promoted and rewarded. Norwegian academic communities must maintain a level that makes it possible for them to benefit in full from the most outstanding foreign research in the area concerned. At the same time, a number of communities should be at the cutting edge of international research in their fields. Among the measures designed to promote quality were increased use of evaluations, more emphasis on quality when allocating basic grants to institutions and a system of Centres of Excellence.

Much has been achieved in the short period since 1999. First of all, our universities have been through a major restructuring – the so-called “Quality Reform” – fully financed by public funds. In general, the “Quality Reform” has been a reform of tertiary education. It includes a new degree structure according to the criteria of the Bologna Process. For assessment of studies, the Norwegian Agency for Quality Assurance in Education has been established as from 1 January 2003. I would also like to mention that a few days ago, a bill proposing common legislation for all higher educational institutions, both private and public, was put before Parliament. But the reform has also affected research as a consequence of more freedom to the universities in organisational matters. Moreover, as part of the reform, a new financing system has been introduced that has quality assessment of research as one of its components. Universities have also enjoyed substantial allocations to infrastructure and a number of new PhD positions. These are measures to strengthen research efforts.

Internationalisation is another vital part of the “Quality Reform”. The overall aim is to ensure a competitive higher education sector through increased cross-border institutional cooperation, as well as student, teacher and researcher mobility. Consequently, the institutions are strongly encouraged to participate in European and other international education and research programmes. It is of the utmost importance that we manage to create strong research groups if we want to participate in international collaboration. The universities are facing great challenges in this respect, especially when it comes to research leadership.

In recent years, the patterns of international collaboration have changed and increased substantially both in the private and public sector. Let me mention one example: Almost 50 percent of all scientific articles in 2002 from Norwegian scientists were co-authored with scientists from other countries. This is a positive development.

The Norwegian Fund for Innovation and Research – which was established in 1999 with income from the petroleum sector – has made increased investment in research possible. The fund was established with the aim of realizing major political priorities, as stated above. In line with these priorities, the yields deriving from the fund are used for long-term basic research in general and especially within the four priority areas. There was – and there still is – a broad political consensus in Norway that more economic and human resources should be invested in R&D. The speed with which the fund has been built up, is a good proof. The fund has now reached 31,8 billion Norwegian kroner , and another billion will be added by July 1 this year. The yield from this last addition to the fund will be used to strengthen basic research related to the petroleum sector.

Since 2002 also the FUGE (functional genomics) programme has received allocations from the fund. With 150 mill. Norwegian kroner per year, this is an ambitious effort – by national standards – to raise the quality of research in this area and to promote national industrial development.

Also, the Norwegian Centres of Excellence scheme was initiated with funding from this source. I am pleased to say that the scheme – designed and implemented by the Research Council – has been a major success. In June 2002 13 centres were selected, based on international peer review. The subjects chosen show a wide variety, ranging from civil war and linguistic development to brain cells and oil reservoirs. It is especially interesting to see that geology and petroleum research are represented with two strong groups. These are areas where Norway has had a special focus for many years and where we have had good results.

All the centres have been granted generous long-term funding, which means an average of 10 to 20 million Norwegian kroner per centre per year, and funding will be available for a maximum of 10 years. The main criterion for the selection has been scientific quality, as judged by international standards, applying to the research to be conducted as well as to the centres’ key scientific personnel. In the selection process, importance has been attached to strong international cooperation, as the aim of the scheme has been to bring more researchers and research groups up to a high international standard. A strong administration has also been stressed. I am especially pleased with our success in attracting top quality scientists from abroad to some of the centres. The directors of two of them have in fact been recruited from abroad. I am also pleased that the scheme will be extended by creating more centres from 2007, based on a call for proposals to be issued next year.

Today international cooperation is more essential than ever as knowledge is developing much faster than before. The large and complex infrastructures and investments that are needed in science cannot be provided by a single nation. The geographic coverage and the lengthy timescales required for certain initiatives are also important. In this context it should also be pointed out that the observations we have made during decades on marine temperature and climate turn out to be critical for our understanding of climate change. Our understanding of and research on the oceans also have a bearing on our understanding of manmade changes in the weather. The changes taking place in the polar areas seem to be particularly sensitive indicators for such changes. I will point to the unique research facilities at Svalbard that are well suited for this research.

As you know, we have also been very fortunate in attracting students and researchers from abroad to the unique possibilities for study and research activities at Svalbard.The infrastructure available at the international research site New Ålesund, lends itself to research of fundamental importance in areas such as climate and marine research. I am pleased to announce that Norway is now building a new arctic marine laboratory in New Ålesund. I have been invited to place the foundation stone for this laboratory on June 26 ^th.> The marine laboratory will provide new and exciting possibilities for research activities on Svalbard, and even more extended international cooperation. We expect the laboratory to be operational by summer 2005.

The European framework programme is an important tool both in networking our research groups and in obtaining higher quality in research. Norway has so far participated broadly in the present and past EU framework programmes, but our aim is to further increase and strengthen this participation. In the fifth framework programme, Norway participated in nearly 1100 projects, with an EU funding of approximately 2 billion Norwegian kroner. In a recent evaluation of the Norwegian participation in the fifth framework programme, 77 percent of the respondents characterized the cooperation as successful. I am proud to say that our participation in the sixth framework programme has also shown a high success rate so far.

But there are still some challenges ahead. One central recommendation in the evaluation just mentioned, is that we should aim for more interplay and synergies between national programmes and the framework programme. This is an important issue we will need to discuss further in the new White Paper on research which I am preparing for Parliament. Another recommendation is that Norway should consider the strategic advantage of a stronger liaison function in Brussels. I am pleased to say that we are already following up this recommendation and will establish a Norwegian liaison office for research in Brussels. The office will offer professional assistance to researchers and provide a meeting place for different actors involved in European research. It will be established in the autumn this year.

The Commission document on the future of European research policy is due today. I understand that the aim is to start a broad dialogue before the more formal proposal on the 7th framework programme will be presented early next year. We welcome this opportunity for a science policy discussion at European level. I feel certain that this discussion will provide valuable input into our own work on a new White Paper on research. I have noted with interest the clear indication that the EU will put stronger emphasis on basic research in the time to come. Scientific excellence in all fields of science and technology is to be encouraged through support for individual research teams in competition at European level. I readily support this initiative.

As I already mentioned, The Government will present a new White Paper on research to Parliament early in 2005. The Ministry has recently started an open dialogue with researchers, research organisations, industry and the public. Institutions and organisations have been invited to provide input, and the Ministry has already received more than 60 reports with comments and suggestions. This extensive activity, involving many actors both in the research and business community indicate that research policy generates a high level of interest.

The White Paper will take stock of the situation today, both with respect to economic and human resources, and will outline the Government’s ambitions and priorities in the coming years. From what I have already said, you will understand that internationalization of research will be an important and cross-cutting theme. What is also clear, is that we will be analyzing the different parts of the research performing level, especially the institute sector. A comprehensive evaluation of this sector has been initiated, and the Ministry has commissioned reports on the position of the research institutes in the international market and their role in the Norwegian innovation system.

What is the situation today with regard to basic research in Norway ? The percentage of basic research compared to other types of R&D activities has remained at a relatively low level (16-17) during the late 1990s. But the differences are large between the different sectors of performance. The basic research percentage in the higher education sector has stayed at around 50 since the 1980s. In the forthcoming White Paper we shall have to discuss several aspects of the situation for universities and other research institutions where basic research is performed – financial systems, recruitment systems and so on. It seems clear that universities are facing several challenges: Recent evaluations of Norwegian research show certain structural problems that need to be solved – having to do with organisation, leadership and strategic planning. Also, a strengthening of national and international collaboration is being strongly recommended. Both the universities themselves, the Research Council and different ministries are in the process of following up these recommendations.

It is probably too early to say whether measures taken during this Government’s period to raise the quality of Norwegian research have had a major effect. But we see positive signs: For the first time in 20 years, Norway rates above the world average in citations. Our success rate in the Sixth Framework Programme is high, as mentioned earlier. It seems to me that we are moving towards a new era of more cooperation and co-ordination – both nationally and internationally – and a greater acceptance of the need to stimulate research excellence by encouraging competition. I find that the spirit of the Norwegian research community is good, and that is perhaps most important of all.

Thank you for your attention.