C Explanatory memorandum
by Mr Olivier Becht, rapporteur
1 Introduction
1. The economic and development
model followed by our societies is steering us towards a disaster foretold,
of which the warning signs are clear to see. Not only are we exhausting
the natural resources that we need for our lives but also there
is not one single ecosystem that has been spared from human intervention and
our biosphere is constantly further deteriorating. Climate disruption,
with its cohort of harmful effects is one of the most powerful demonstrations
of the abyss that lies ahead if we do not change course.
1.1 The
need to achieve carbon neutrality by 2050
2. The final document of the United
Nations Summit dedicated to the adoption of the post-2015 development
agenda “
Transforming
our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development” (adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on
25 September 2015)
Note sets Goal 13 “Take urgent action
to combat climate change and its impacts” and, in that context,
called for the integration of “climate change measures into national
policies, strategies and planning” (Target 13.2). The same document,
under Goal 12 “Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns”
includes the target “substantially reduce waste generation through
prevention, reduction, recycling and reuse” (Target 12.5).
3. Following on from these goals, 196 Parties to the “United
Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change” (UNFCCC), meeting
at the COP 21 in Paris, adopted the Paris Agreement
Note on 12 December 2015, which
entered into force on 4 November 2016
Note and has been ratified by 46 Council
of Europe member States and by the European Union. The central aim
of this international treaty is to “strengthen the global response
to the threat of climate change, in the context of sustainable development
and efforts to eradicate poverty”, including by “holding the increase
in the global average temperature to well below 2°C” and “pursuing
efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C above pre-industrial
levels” (Article 2).
Note To achieve
that aim, the Parties are required to cut greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions
in order to reach climate neutrality during the second half of the
century (Article 4).
4. To implement the Paris Agreement, most of the world's countries
have made serious commitments to cut or minimise their emissions;
those commitments are known as Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs).
The European Union is striving to set an example and is aiming to
hit the objective of zero net GHG emissions by 2050. France and
the United Kingdom have already enshrined that objective in law.
5. However, the
Emissions
Gap Report 2020 of the United Nations Environment Programme points to
the discrepancy between the GHG emission levels resulting from current
policies, those envisaged in the current NDCs by 2030 and, above
all, those that would enable us to attain the goal of zero net emissions
by 2050. According to the report, the current NDCs are woefully
inadequate if we are to attain the climate aims laid down in the
Paris Agreement: as things stand, they would result in temperature
increases of at least 3°C by the end of the century. The European
Commission indicates a similar finding in its communication of 11
December 2019, which sets out a European Green Deal for the European
Union and its citizens.
Note
6. A recent report by the think tank EMBER
Note analysed the European
Union’s National Energy and Climate Plans (NECPs),
Note which were submitted by all
EU countries by the end of 2019, to assess the planned progress in
the electricity sector over the coming key decade. According to
the report, the renewable electricity generation will almost double
to deliver nearly 60% of EU electricity by 2030; despite this, fossil
fuels are still expected to generate about 25% of EU electricity,
with coal power only halving over the next decade and no plan to
reduce fossil gas. Without corrections, the conclusion of the report
is that the EU could not deliver the 55% reduction in total emissions
by 2030.
7. Acting quickly and effectively in this area is a necessary
condition for safeguarding not only the right to a healthy environment,
but also the right to decent living conditions for all, and even
the right to life itself, as the consequences of climate change,
as well as the effects of the progressive depletion of resources
we are overexploiting will be tragic for hundreds of millions of
people, especially the most vulnerable, and will undermine social
cohesion, democratic stability and peace in all regions of the world.
We are at a crossroads: the choices we make today will radically
determine our tomorrow and that of future generations.
1.2 Scope
of the investigation and main avenues of inquiry
8. Policies in the field of research
and innovation have a key role to play in guiding and supporting
the search for effective solutions and promoting scientific and
technical progress as well as corporate choices and social attitudes,
making it possible to shift towards a sustainable development model.
Note
9. As the European Commission points out in its communication
of 11 December 2019, “new technologies, sustainable solutions and
disruptive innovation are critical to achieve the objectives of
the European Green Deal”. In this connection, the Commission has
launched
Horizon
Europe, the EU's framework programme for research and innovation
for the period 2021-2027; this programme, in synergy with other
EU programmes, will play a pivotal role in leveraging national public
and private investments and in promoting green partnerships in the
field of research and innovation.
10. A report on research policies may seem rather far removed
from the themes of human rights, democracy and the rule of law;
however we are cutting to the heart of the issue of effective environmental
protection. It is research (and the instruments developed through
research) that allows us to monitor changes in the state of our
planet, to identify problems and to model scenarios regarding the
impact of various possible measures. And it is research that can
provide us with the innovative solutions we need to counter both
the impoverishment of our planet and the problem of climate change,
and to ensure the sustainable development of our societies.
11. The aim of my report is to draw the attention of Council of
Europe member States to the urgent need to rethink and perhaps refocus
research policies, so that they could better serve the goal of reducing
GHG emissions
Note and
achieving climate neutrality by 2050.
12. In this connection, I will address two key issues. The first
concerns the direction that research should take: what are the most
important avenues of research and, consequently, what research should
be prioritised for funding in order to better arm ourselves and
successfully combat climate change? A second question concerns the
governance of research policy: what considerations do policy makers
need to bear in mind and what should be the cornerstones of the
research strategy, in order to optimise its impact?
13. My analysis covers only some of the many options available
and the numerous more specific issues that arise. I will nevertheless
try to highlight a few points which, in my view, require careful
consideration, and to identify courses of action that policy makers
could pursue to (re)orient research policies towards the objective of
a green economy.
14. A profound change in our economic systems is needed if we
are to save our planet, and there are many interrelated factors
involved. Among other things, to reduce wastage of energy and resources
(including our water consumption), we need to rethink an economic
model that is too heavily reliant on (over) consumption, to have
the courage to take a stand against planned obsolescence of goods
and review our consumption habits, to think about how we could better
organise our living spaces, our cities and our transport systems,
and to design and build homes that require less energy to build
and to run, etc.
15. Given, however, the growth of the world's population, social
and economic development (which must benefit all and not just a
few) and progress itself, with the new horizons it opens up and
the new human ambitions it engenders (one only has to think of the
energy consumption linked to the expansion of the digital world,
and the new plans to conquer space and colonise other planets),
it seems to me that any scenarios which assume a decline in energy
consumption must be ruled out.
16. We will need more and more energy. Reducing the carbon footprint
of human activities therefore necessarily requires decarbonised
energy production.
Note For
this reason, with regard to the first issue mentioned above, my
analysis will focus first on the energy sources of the future. However,
it is important to remember that the way we use resources today
is not sustainable; another key focus of research, therefore, is the
circular economy. The report will address this aspect with regard
to research aimed at the reduction, recycling and reuse of the resources
on which our economies so heavily rely, including those required
for energy transition, without which development would come to a
halt. Lastly, with regard to the governance of research, I would
like to address the need to leverage synergies, pooling of efforts
and sharing of knowledge at national, European and global levels.
17. I have also based my analysis and proposals on the contributions
from the experts who took part in our hearing on 5 February 2021;
I am grateful to them for their invaluable assistance in our work.
Note
2 Research into clean energies
18. There are many different pathways
we can take to meet the 1.5°C limit, however, in the scenarios modelled
by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), all 1.5°C
pathways share certain features, including unabated coal use being
largely phased out by mid-century, renewables meeting the majority
of future electricity supplies and energy use being progressively
electrified and made more efficient.
Note Rapid
progress in the electricity sector is therefore essential to limiting
global warming to 1.5°C.
19. In this respect, energy transition poses a new problem: the
challenge is no longer to identify and learn how to efficiently
exploit new energy sources in addition to the fossil sources dominant
at present, in order to satisfy growing demand, but rather to replace,
as quickly as possible, by carbon-free energy sources, the fossil fuels
– natural gas, coal and oil – on which energy production still largely
depends.
Note
20. The challenge to go to zero carbon emissions is huge: it could
be easy to reach a share of 50% electricity production by renewables,
but then the question is how to go to 75%, and “the last 25% becomes
very very difficult”.
Note
2.1 Going
for solar, but not exclusively
21. Solar radiation, wind, waves,
tides, marine or river currents and the heat from the Earth’s core
are all sources of clean energy for which technologies exist, albeit
with different degrees of maturity. In theory, each of these sources
has the potential to provide us with an abundance of clean energy,
but all face obstacles to their development.
22. It is highly likely that a good energy mix is the right solution
for an effective and rapid energy transition, at least for the next
few decades. At the same time, conditions (including constraints
arising from the level of socio-economic development) and opportunities
(for example those related to local resources) may vary greatly
from one country to another and from one region of the planet to
another. This observation is of little help when it comes to guiding
research, however.
23. More broadly (and focusing, too, on forms of global sharing),
towards which source(s) of clean energy should we be directing our
attention, if not exclusively, then at least chiefly? Although wind
currently comes top of the list (after hydropower, which cannot
be the solution, however) in terms of global production of clean electricity,
solar seems to offer the greatest potential in both the short and
the longer term.
24. The arguments in favour of solar energy are essentially as
follows:
- as a source of energy,
solar radiation is extremely easily accessible, freely available
everywhere and to everyone, and just a small fraction of this energy
is sufficient to meet the global demand for energy, without fear
of shortages, for the rest of our planet’s existence;
- producing electrical energy from solar radiation does
not in itself cause pollution; it is emission-free (including noise-free)
and the process itself does not generate waste or consume water;
- electricity production using photovoltaic techniques is
modular and can be located as close as possible to the point of
consumption, both in urban areas and in remote areas with low population
densities, where other technologies would be less suitable; in particular,
technological advances and nanotechnologies already offer the prospect
of solutions that should enable photovoltaic systems to be seamlessly
incorporated not only into glass surfaces, but into surfaces of
any type, including flexible ones, even fabric;
- the International Energy Agency already considers photovoltaics
(PV) to be the cheapest source of energy.
25. Although all these arguments strike me as very compelling,
they do nevertheless need to be examined in greater depth, mainly
for two reasons: the first one is that the development of solar
(like other renewable sources) is not without its problems; the
second reason is that, de facto, other industries are already up
and running and taking root (including in terms of economic development
and jobs) and, since they too can contribute to the goal of carbon
neutrality, it would be foolish to disregard them completely.
2.2 The
challenges of energy transition
26. To steer the research effort,
it is important to objectively assess all the constraints – economic,
social, environmental and temporal – that are apt to make certain
paths hazardous. There is doubtless an element of risk in any research
and innovation policy, but it is important to understand and evaluate
it, so as to accept only that part of the risk which is unavoidable,
in the absence of viable alternatives. It is also important to understand the
consequences of our strategic choices: only by moving forward with
full knowledge of the facts, and having clearly identified the pitfalls,
can we achieve our goals.
27. For example, the electrification of transport is undoubtedly
crucial both for achieving climate neutrality and for improving
the quality of life in our urban centres; hence the focus on electric
cars. That in turn, however, requires us to produce the (clean)
electrical energy needed to charge the batteries in electric cars.
If the electricity in the grid is produced from fossil sources,
having cars that are (as we say) “clean” to run does not really
reduce the carbon footprint of mobility: the footprint has merely
been displaced. This brings us back to the issue of primary energy
production from clean sources.
28. Renewable energy sources are already available, and the various
technological achievements and scientific innovations aimed at making
better use of them have been enthusiastically received; exploiting renewables
is not yet that straightforward,
Note however, and it is the job of research to
provide us with the right answers.
29. Among the most obvious constraints that could hold back energy
transition are the costs: the cost of research and experimentation,
the cost of production facilities (to be created or adapted) and
of the products themselves (including the cost of basic materials
and specialised labour), along with the costs involved in upgrading
the electricity grid.
30. Minimising costs is one of the challenges of research. This
obviously involves looking at the entire cycle and all the factors
involved in the production and distribution or storage of renewables.
For now, however, cost is no longer a major obstacle, in Europe
at any rate, because in the case of certain “mature” technologies, especially
in the solar and wind sectors, these costs are now very competitive.
31. The cost of developing and bringing to market the various
technologies being explored is a major consideration for policy
makers and it is important to remember that we are looking for solutions
that work globally and not just for rich countries. However, these
costs now need to be put into perspective and should not be the
overriding concern: the decision-making process about how we invest
in energy – including in research – must reflect and prioritise
the need to respond rapidly to environmental degradation and the
climate crisis.
32. An important element – and another area for research – is
energy performance, or more precisely the “energy return on investment”
(EROI), namely the amount of final usable energy (produced by an
equipment over its life cycle) divided by the amount of energy used
to obtain it (including the energy used to build and operate the
plant). The EROI thus provides a measure of the energy efficiency
of a project. Renewable energy technologies are already outperforming
fossil fuels,
Note but
that should not hinder research efforts to further improve the energy
performance of equipment, both in terms of efficiency and life span.
33. The performance of the equipment and its life span are also
considerations, together with the materials used, in assessing another
very significant aspect: environmental impact. We are all aware
of the disastrous impact of fossil fuels but it is also important
to fully appreciate the damage caused by the extraction of the rare metals
and minerals used in the various types of renewable energy production
and storage equipment. European societies refuse to accept these
costs, but they exist nevertheless, and are being borne by populations
in other parts of the world. Ignoring these costs (or underestimating
them, for the sake of a clear conscience) will not advance the environmental
cause at the global level. It may be that, at this stage of the energy
transition at any rate, these costs are something we just have to
accept, but research must be directed at reducing them as far as
possible: alternatives need to be found and promoted.
34. In addition to the pollution and other environmental damage
caused by mining, policy makers cannot ignore other forms of environmental
impact that renewable energy production may have. Examples include
the visual and noise pollution from wind farms, or the risks posed
by the fracking techniques used (until now at any rate) to exploit
geothermal energy. The presence of substances that may be hazardous
to health (such as lead, for example) must also be taken into account.
These are factors that ought to be considered in research policies
in order to move towards solutions that can minimise this impact.
35. When we talk about equipment, we are talking not only about
equipment that captures renewables and converts them into electrical
energy, but also about the equipment that may be necessary to store
electrical energy and then distribute it. It is important to remember
here that what is needed is energy on demand. Fossil fuels and nuclear
power are well suited to this requirement. Nuclear power plants
and thermal power plants that use fossil fuels (within the limits
of their capacity) can produce and distribute electricity in a modular
way, according to needs, without waste and without disruption.
Note
36. Wind and solar power cannot guarantee regular production of
electricity (the latter is dependent on sunshine and wind intensity,
which are subject to major fluctuations depending on whether it
is night or day, and what season it is) that can be modulated according
to demand (which in turn varies with the time of day and time of
year). When production is insufficient, it has to be supplemented
and when it is intense, the energy produced is not (entirely) fed
into the grid or used immediately. In order not to waste this energy
– and in order to be able to use it when production levels are low
– it must be stored. Today, the cost of storage technologies (i.e.
batteries) is fairly low, so storage is a solution that could be
suitable for daily (day-night) cycles. Storage, however, comes with
its own set of challenges and constraints: for example, it does
not seem to be a feasible solution for offsetting the large seasonal
fluctuations in photovoltaic energy production.
37. The importance of this issue is magnified by the fact that
moving to a carbon-neutral economy means using electrical energy
for (almost) everything, and in particular for transport and heating.
This will greatly increase demand for electricity, and make it absolutely
essential to have both a steady flow of energy and electricity networks
that are robust, resilient and secure. Here again, research and
infrastructure development has a key role to play in exploring the
various options for decentralising energy production, injecting
surplus energy produced by individuals into the main grid, creating
mini-grids and interconnecting them, or even the possibility of
intercontinental and interhemispheric grid connections.
38. This last option was presented to our committee as a potential
solution to the problem of seasonal fluctuations in photovoltaic
energy production
Note and
as a way to move towards a global clean energy system. To go in
this direction, Professor Steininger listed some issues for research
and innovation policy, for example engineering, physics and groundworks
of intercontinental and deep-sea cable transmission.
39. This option is attractive in economic terms and in terms of
mutual development. However, it requires close international collaboration,
as well as a very high level of mutual trust between the partners,
both for securing delivery of the project (which also requires the
various stakeholders to simultaneously expand their production capacity)
and for managing the energy transmission system. It also raises
the issue of the security and resilience of the system, because
– beyond the goodwill and reliability of the partners – we unfortunately live
in a world where the threat of terrorism is ever present; damaging
an energy transmission system seems to be easier than repairing
it.
40. Professor Steininger noted that there is currently significant
demand for hydrogen/renewable electricity in industry and it referred
to “circular carbon management”, explaining that demand for steel
production conversion and cement industry carbon capture and use
alone would by far exceed remaining additional renewable electricity
capacity in many countries, not mentioning other demands (transport,
household heat pumps, other industry). Here, the research issues
would be the alternatives to hydrogen (as there were a lot of conversion
losses) for selected applications and the integrated systems of
functionalities and accordingly the integrated renewable energy
systems. These remarks provide us with a first example of an interconnection between
the matter of energy transition and that of the circular economy.
41. Finally, research to develop current renewable energies and
reduce their environmental footprint should not prevent us from
looking at new energy sources in parallel. Indeed, we are only in
the 21st century and humility must incline us to think that there
are probably sources of energy in nature that humans have not yet discovered.
Thus, the knowledge and mastery of atomic energy are less than a
century old and it is very likely that further discoveries remain
to be made. This requires strengthening basic research efforts on
the energies of the future and ensuring exchanges within the scientific
community on any progress that might prove interesting in this regard.
Similarly, it is important that States, despite the health crisis
and its economic costs, do not abandon scientific research projects
that will perhaps develop our knowledge towards the future control of
sustainable, abundant and cheap energy.
3 Research
into the circular economy
42. There will be no sustainable
development without a radical change toward circular economy. Within
the EU framework this is clearly perceived: the European Commission
has adopted a new
Circular
Economy Action Plan – one of the main blocks of the
European Green
Deal, Europe’s new agenda for sustainable growth.
43. The circular economy is a model of production and consumption
aimed at extending the life cycle of products, to reduce the use
of raw materials and waste production to a minimum. When a product
reaches the end of its life, the objective is to recover as many
of its materials as possible and keep them within the economic cycle,
thereby creating further value without consumption of other resources.
44. Therefore, circular economy is opposite to the traditional,
linear economic model consisting in a take-make-dispose pattern,
and to planned obsolescence. It is about “closing the life-cycle”
of products, services, waste, materials, water and energy, according
to the approach which is be resumed with the “three RS”:
Reuse,
Repair and
Recycle.
Note
45. Developing the circular economy is a necessity. It stems firstly
from the fact that the resources (not only energy resources) that
we use are limited; reusing them reduces the risk of scarcity and
in some cases (such as rare minerals) also helps to preserve the
economic independence, or even sovereignty, of our States. This need
is rendered all the more obvious by the fact that our economic model
is also based on the perishable nature of the goods on the market
and therefore on the need for users to replace them periodically;
an economic model that should be questioned.
46. No less urgent is the need to move towards a circular economy
in order to protect the environment. One only has to think of the
growing difficulties encountered in managing non-recycled waste
and the pollution generated by its dispersal in the soil or the
sea. An example that immediately springs to mind is plastic: finding a
method for breaking down all plastic materials quickly, cheaply
and in an environmentally-friendly way and then reusing their basic
components would be a major step towards a true circular economy.
To exemplify, among the research topics of the CNRS in France (research
that also includes the social sciences),
Note I
would like to insist on processes for the recovery of critical metals
and rare earths.
48. Directive 2006/66/EC requires at least 50% of the materials
contained in waste batteries and accumulators to be recycled and
imposes an obligation on producers to collect waste batteries at
their own expense, before recycling them either by their own means
or with the help of a specialist partner. The recycling of electric
car batteries is an – entirely appropriate – obligation for all
car manufacturers, therefore. There is a growing awareness in the
automotive industry of the economic as well as the environmental
challenges of battery recycling and in particular of the chemistry
of lithium-ion batteries (or even cells), and therefore of lithium,
but also of other metals such as cobalt, nickel or manganese.
49. The idea is to delay recycling as long as possible, by reusing
batteries that no longer meet the requirements of an electric car,
and then reusing as much of the raw materials obtained from recycling
as possible in a “short loop”, to make new batteries for electric
vehicles. This reduces the extraction and transportation of new
resources; in this circular business model, moreover, the lithium-ion
battery gains additional value and so helps to reduce the cost passed
on to buyers of electric cars.
Note
50. The example I have just mentioned also allows me to take up
some of the points made by Ms Lazaric, which I think are particularly
relevant. First of all, the economic impact of the circular economy
should not be overlooked: in France, studies by the National Institute
for Statistics and Economic Studies (INSEE) point to the considerable
job creation potential of the green economy, which includes the
circular economy and renewable energies: the circular economy sector
is the one with the fastest-growing added value and the highest
number of patents.
51. In addition, great entrepreneurial drive is being exhibited
by major groups, start-ups and other circular economy players, such
as co-operatives and all the social and solidarity economy bodies
that are operating at the local level, are involved in social and
innovative experimentation, employ social inclusion-based approaches
and provide context-based local solutions in view of the major challenges
of the circular economy.
52. The impact should also be noted – in this case beneficial
impact – of regulation: environmental regulation (on energy and
renewable energy but also on waste and recycling of plastics) has
prompted industry to act, has brought about innovations and technological
solutions, and has encouraged research on new scientific issues.
53. It is also essential to generate the conditions for a social
acceptance of innovations, and therefore to recognise the importance
of research in the human and social sciences to determine the social
acceptability of innovations, as well as research into behavioural
economics and into environmental preferences, to ensure that the
circular economy could fit into a supply/demand dynamic.
54. Finally, the role of areas and regions should not be disregarded,
as they are the drivers of that economy and of the social and solidarity
economy; a top-down approach should be avoided, and the focus should
be on the players that introduce innovative solutions in areas and
regions and back them up, in order for the circular economy to be
able to really have a social impact and reduce inequalities.
4 Some
thoughts on the governance of research policy
4.1 The
need to consider geostrategic issues
55. The production and storage
of renewables – and in particular solar and wind energy – requires
large amounts of rare metals and minerals. According to the JRC
report on “Raw materials demand for wind and solar PV technologies
in the transition towards a decarbonised energy system” in a high-demand
scenario, demand for many key materials is expected to increase
significantly (for example demand for germanium would increase 86
times; demand for indium, gallium, tellurium, cadmium, and selenium
would increase between 36 and 40 times; and for neodymium, praseodymium,
dysprosium and terbium between 14 and 16 times). This would put
considerable pressure on materials supply. The report accordingly
stresses that continuous assessment of future demand for key raw
materials is necessary to ensure uninterrupted supply chains that facilitate
the large-scale deployment of renewable energy in line with the
strategic objective of carbon neutrality by 2050.
56. The European Commission “
Orientations
towards the first Strategic Plan for Horizon Europe” points to the need to ensure the competitive edge and
sovereignty of EU industry (p. 81). Assuming that the current mines
or known deposits of these minerals can meet exponentially growing
demand over a sufficiently long period (which is probably not the
case), we should not underestimate the risks to which we would expose ourselves
by becoming dependent on the countries that produce these rare minerals
whose widespread use (in the absence of their full recycling) can
only lead to increased prices, scarcity and exhaustion.
57. Failure to take due account of these risks in research policies,
with a view to countering them, will only make us weaker. Energy
transition must be accomplished whilst preserving our economic independence
and, ultimately, our sovereignty. We need to take account not only
of economic, social and environmental constraints but also of the
geopolitical risk in the approach to research innovation and work
in the area of the energy transition, because, alongside sustainable
development issues, there was also the question of markets and strategic
autonomy.
Note
58. The above-mentioned report by the JRC identifies possible
actions to avoid raw material shortages; these include diversifying
their supplies, expanding trade agreements, and promoting new mining
activities. I would however insist on two other key recommendations
therein: increasing recycling and substitution of critical materials,
enabled through dedicated research and innovation programmes, which
should be considered whenever possible and economically feasible.
59. In this last respect, it is a pity, in my view, that an innovative
project such as the one involving sodium-ion battery technology
should be experiencing visibility and financing difficulties that
are hindering the transition from prototype production to larger-scale
manufacturing aimed at bringing the product to market; and it would be
an even greater pity if the French company that developed this technology
thanks to governmental and EU funding were to find itself forced
(for lack of alternatives) to accept the tempting offer it has received
to move to China.
Note Cases like these
should be a wake-up call to us and it is vital that policy makers
demonstrate consistency and foresight.
60. Going in the right direction, the European battery alliance
(the “Airbus of batteries”) is not repeating the mistake made with
solar panels:
Note the
European Union is investing in the development of supply, and innovation
and research are central to the alliance. The plan places emphasis
on the environmental aspects of batteries, on the circular economy
and on eco-design; this can ultimately enable Europe to develop
a competitive advantage and defend its own interests. For example,
eco-design and recycling would not only limit the environmental
footprint of batteries but also enable resources not found on the
continent of Europe (but in China, India, etc.) to be recovered.
Research nonetheless has to be done to set up urban mines, thus supporting,
at the same time, local European industry.
4.2 Pooling
research efforts at national and international levels
61. Whatever the strategic direction
of research, working in synergy and pooling research efforts is
essential. The collaborative approach affords an opportunity to
better address three types of difficulties:
- the complexity and multidimensional nature of the problems
in question, which require multiple skills and areas of expertise
that the various stakeholders often possess only in part;
- the delays inherent in exploration and the need to test
solutions so as to select only processes and products which show
promise, delays that the collaborative approach can help overcome
through task sharing (including according to respective expertise);
- the costs involved in research, experimentation and evaluation
of proposed solutions, and in product development and marketing,
all of which involves a degree of financial risk that is very difficult
for players to bear on their own.
62. Professor Simon gave the example of the Research Network on
Electrochemical Energy Storage (RS2E) and of the virtuous circle
created by laboratories carrying out basic research and, through
the establishments specialising in technology transfer, transferring
it to the industrial partners. In his opinion, the major European
research projects should draw on the structuring of research at
the national level and should strengthen the joint funding of laboratory-industry
projects on strategic matters. In such projects, laboratories very
quickly identify innovative developments and start-ups are there
to take on the risk inherent in innovation and grow rapidly with
the support of the major companies to develop academic-industrial
collaboration; therefore from the outset, synergies need to be strengthened
between laboratories and industry on issues identified.
63. In the same vein, Professor Steininger highlighted that pooling
of efforts, to get cross-company value-added chains working is crucial.
Common research can be the leverage to foster such collaboration.
A successful transformation to a green economy involves effective
solutions in individual subsystems, but the connection of subsystem
solutions is also crucial; therefore, research governance needs
to foster and support work on these connections.
64. In order to enhance collaboration, synergies and pooling of
efforts at domestic, European and global levels, Professor Steininger
proposed to value the role of science. Co-design, co-creation, co-production between
scientists and stakeholders is already broadly taking place and
science could partly act as a “neutral” information broker between
society and even policy, on the one hand, and industry on the other;
it could provide a dialogue platform for information exchange. However,
new skills are needed for science reaching out to practitioner-policy
dialogues and stakeholder dialogue processes and transdisciplinary
research should be fostered.
65. Regarding public-private synergies, he considers that national
and European research funds needed to be geared more towards long-term
innovation demands.
Note He
also advocates co-operation between universities and large companies
and the creation (which should be fostered with incentives) of consortia among
large companies to work together with publicly funded science. Finally,
he underlines the importance to define core areas (for example renewable
energy) where co-operation between the European Union and the outside
is crucial and to design the research framework accordingly, to
allow for such co-operation for mutual benefit.
66. Mr Laboué reminded us that China’s spending on research and
development already exceeds that of the European Union: no European
country is in a position on its own to release sufficient investment
capacities or offer a large enough market without the development
of synergies with other European countries. In this regard, the
important projects of common European interest (IPCEIs), such as
those concerning batteries, can play a key role to trigger European
synergies throughout the value chain.
67. More broadly, there are many European programmes in which
all stakeholders, even small players, could take part; it may be
possible for national authorities in EU countries to strengthen
the European dimension of their research policies, and to encourage
and support participation in these programmes through tools such
as better information, advice and assistance in completing the required
steps and procedures and financial incentives.
68. Ms Lazaric widens our horizon in two important directions.
First, public action (at all levels) should not lose sight of the
“common good”; therefore private interests should not take precedence
over public interests and thus relegate the common good and the
sustainable development goals to the back burner. Second, concerning
international research, many players from sub-Saharan Africa or
South East Asia were completely absent when it came to the subject
of the decarbonised economy: co-operation agreements should be put
in place to include all absent players and enable them to participate
in international research.
5 Final remarks
and proposals for action
69. Mr Berloznik urged us to frame
the discussion on research policy in the current context: a "world
of change", where changes are rapid, including within the Science,
Technology and Innovation (STI) and knowledge systems; a world whose
constituent parts are interdependent. Interconnections must be taken
into account, both in decision making and in the quest for technological
answers to current problems, and these answers are perforce multisectoral.
At the same time, policy solutions (and hence plans) necessarily
involve several levels, from local to international, both in their
development and in their delivery.
70. The current complexity is also due to the increasing number
of actors in the STI system. Alongside traditional actors, governments,
universities and the private sector (the so-called "triple helix"),
citizens and communities have entered the fray, contributing to
the development of new ideas and approaches. Citizen participation
is, in this context, both a democratic requirement and a condition
for achieving the desired results: citizens are the drivers of the
paradigm shift, and the ones who bring it about through their action.
71. Interdependency and complexity trigger cross-cutting fields
and issues-oriented co-operation between researchers and research
and development actors, and make this co-operation indispensable;
for example, water issues, climate resilience, energy and resource
management go hand in hand. New research and development communities
(“virtual” but also “spatial” ones) are established around the emerging
issues; for example, in the field of energy, there is a concentration
of knowledge in specific places, where universities, research institutes
and start-ups were working together to build knowledge, and usable,
efficient and effective technologies and solutions.
Note These developments
meant new governance challenges. Not only funding and how to distribute
funding but also how to cope with these new complexities.
72. Against this turbulent backdrop, the Sustainable Development
Goals point the way. Support for these goals and awareness of the
need to build a sustainable future for our children are rapidly
gaining ground in our societies: they should inspire our action
plans, and guide efforts and funding priorities for research, innovation and
development.
73. In this respect, I agree with Mr Berloznik that the future
is for “sustainable solutions-targeted policies". Our policy action
must not be diverted from the path of sustainable development; at
the same time, this action must remain pragmatic and effective,
and must be aimed at concrete solutions, because we are running
out of time.
74. We should start from existing solutions, namely existing effective,
market-ready technologies and help them to go on the market and
upscale them. This requires new and creative approaches.
Note Similarly,
at national level, we need to make the best use of existing funding
mechanisms and organisations that are already promoting and supporting
new approaches. An interesting idea
Note is to develop a technology watch
activity in strategic areas (based on start-ups) and to consider
possible innovations in order to identify the best of them and support
their development.
75. To support innovative projects and the move to the commercialisation
stage, significant funding and/or the development of partnerships
with industrial manufacturers is required. There is thus a need
for funding mechanisms that can be activated with a degree of flexibility
and speed and for incentives to create research-industry partnerships
of this kind.
76. It may seem tactless or naive to talk about increasing spending
at a time when the public finances in all countries are under severe
strain due to the economic impact of the Covid-19 pandemic and the
urgent need to address the social distress that this pandemic has
caused among the more vulnerable sections of the population, in
Europe and elsewhere. When seeking to rebuild our societies and
economic systems, however, tomorrow's world is precisely the one
we should be looking to, not yesterday's. To some extent, the crisis
is an opportunity for change, one that we cannot afford to miss.
Research and innovation for the green economy must be among the
“beneficiaries” of national post-crisis recovery plans.
77. Among the possible financing solutions, consideration should
perhaps be given to issuing public debt securities aimed at strategic
research in the fields of energy transition and the circular economy:
“green bonds” to be promoted among the general public. Also, staying
with the idea of leveraging civic engagement, governments might
consider supporting the establishment of a national online platform
with a selection of innovative projects to which the State would
undertake to provide financial support and which would be open to
participatory financing. Banks might conceivably support such a
project, or at least undertake to inform and advise their clients
about the existence of these participatory schemes.
78. Active civic participation and engagement is key to building
the green economy. If the ecological transition is to succeed, a
collective effort is needed and all our citizens must be involved,
not at the end of the chain but from the outset. Behavioural economics
should not make corrections at the end of the process but make it
possible to co-design technical solutions and the innovations of
tomorrow. Citizens must know that they are protagonists and not
merely spectators.
79. Research and innovation in the areas of energy transition
and of circular economy are of major geostrategic importance. The
choices we make must also take into account the risk to our industry
of blindly and hastily adopting technology that we have not sufficiently
mastered and the dangers of dependence in the supply of raw materials
or strategic components, which would undermine European political
autonomy.
80. The economic and strategic stakes behind technological progress
may, in certain cases, create a barrier to international co-operation
in the domains of energy transition and circular economy. It is
however dangerous to turn one’s back on close collaboration in these
research fields. The fight against climate change is an absolutely
key issue that concerns us all; we must all contribute to finding
the right solutions and be able to share them.
81. We must begin by making greater efforts along these lines
within the European framework. The 27 member States of the European
Union are moving in this direction, as the programme Horizon Europe
and the previous Horizon 2020 clearly show, but Europe is bigger
than the European Union and it is important that we be able to work
together (for example, through transnational research programmes)
on a wider European scale.
82. In this respect, I see a key role for the Council of Europe,
a new way of working to strengthen the ties that bind us and the
solidarity between our peoples: I suggest we think about creating
a framework – an enlarged partial agreement, for example – that
would allow us to move forward together by pooling ideas and research
resources for targeted projects. Perhaps the Council of Europe Development
Bank can also contribute its expertise and help create funding mechanisms
for these joint research projects. Some thought could also be given
to creating a strategic resource bank, to create stocks and manage
them in a mutually beneficial way, so as to strengthen the strategic
independence of all our countries.
83. By the way, it is probably not sufficient, even if it is necessary,
to move in the right direction in Europe if other regions lag behind;
the impact of inaction or inefficiency in other parts of the world
will in any case be global, because the consequences of climate
change are global. Here again, pooling efforts can become an instrument
not only for shared sustainable development but also for peace and
friendship between peoples.
84. Reducing the effects of climate change by developing renewable
energies, by discovering new energies and by inventing methods of
recycling all raw materials, all this through scientific and technological
research, is a fascinating challenge for Europe and for the world.
Saving the planet is not incompatible with progress and is even
achieved largely through progress. Imagining ways of working together
between States in the Council of Europe, in accordance with our
statutes, could be a way of working for our Organisation; European
citizens expect strong answers in the field of the environment and,
in the spirit of European construction, it is the de facto solidarity that we will
be able to create, today at the level of Greater Europe, which will
bring people together and ensure that peace is maintained in the
coming decades.
