|

June 2006
Innovation: More effort
needed in Europe
The EPMA will be promoting excellence and innovation in
its Awards
competition in Ghent later this year. But a group chaired
by former
Finnish Prime Minister Esko Aho and sponsored by the European
Commission has concluded that current Europe-wide efforts
to
innovate are simply not enough. It also came up with a thought
for career politicians that may be unpalatable…
Reports on Europe's need to innovate make regular appearances
in and around EU institutions, but no sooner have they been
published than they are relegated to the back of the shelf.
Of course, while the treatment recommended in each of these
reports are, at best, only attempted half-heartedly, problem
resolution is pushed further and further into the future.
Last autumn, the European Council met at Hampton Court, outside
London, to discuss how Europe can address the problems, fears
and opportunities of economic globalisation. One result of
that summit meeting of heads of government was that Esko Aho
was asked to chair a group making recommendations on accelerating
initiatives to boost research and development and innovation
performance.
The group's report calls for a Pact for Research and Innovation,
"to drive the agenda for an innovative Europe".
Its recommendations focus on three complementary areas: Making
the market more innovation-friendly; ensuring resources are
focused on high-quality, productive R&D; and increasing
mobility of human resources, finance and knowledge. The report
concludes with the assertion that large-scale action must
be taken now, "before it is too late".
Esko Aho: "For the first time with this report we have
said without any hesitation that we are not going to reach
the Lisbon goals (for action on growth and jobs, set out in
Lisbon in 2000) on current trends.
"We have called for a Pact since we need action on
a whole package of measures. If you look at the problems in
discussions of the proposed Services Directive you can see
what happens when you try to take decisions separately. When
measures are considered on their own it is very easy to make
objections, so you have to look at the whole structure.
"We have taken the single market programme from the late
1980s and early 1990s as a model. It needed synchronised,
simultaneous efforts across Europe. And the process would
have been impossible without agreement and commitment. Of
course, different people had objections to different specific
proposals, but everybody understood that they would have to
accept negative consequences in some areas in return for benefits
in others."
Another former Prime Minister, Wim Kok of The Netherlands,
who reported in 2004 on progress towards the Lisbon Strategy,
warned of the dangers of spreading efforts too widely. But
Aho says that: "In combining social and technological
objectives it is very important that we focus only on those
efforts that are needed to improve innovation.
"I think it was a mistake in the Lisbon Strategy to
combine efforts to invest in R&D and increase innovation
with maintaining social stability. While we need to invest
in R&D, at the same time we need 'mobility', not stability."
The report suggests that around one in 10 researchers should
change jobs every year, moving between research, industry
and government. "This kind of mobility does not exist
in Europe, and that is an obstacle to innovation," he
says. "And it is something, of course, that should not
be confined to researchers."
One reason that Aho was asked to write this report is that
he headed Finland's government in the early 1990s, when the
country achieved an impressive economic turnaround from the
depression set off by the collapsing Soviet Union. Unemployment
quadrupled to almost 20 per cent and GDP fell sharply. Today,
however, the foundations laid by the Aho government's are
recognised as having helped Finland rise to become one of
Europe's most innovative countries.
He says: "It is easier to make major changes when people
understand the need. In fact the changes in Finland were the
model for our report. AT that time all four parts of the approach
in this report were realised in Finland. We invested in R&D;
we were able to create new markets, both internally in sectors
such as ICT and externally through joining the EU. We had
strong mobility in both private and public sectors because
of economic restructuring, and, finally, our values and attitudes
changed in parallel to economic changes."
But while these policies were successful in the context
of the Finnish economy, a country with around 5 million people,
translating them to the context of the whole EU - with getting
on for 100 times the population of Finland - is no easy task,
as the Aho report notes. "This requires a huge act of
will and commitment from political, business and social leaders.
"While this commitment has been promised repeatedly
by politicians over recent years within the context of the
Lisbon strategy, the lack of progress gives a strong indication
of how well these spoken commitments have been transformed
into action on the ground.
The big fear for politicians is the impact of unpopular
policies in the ballot box, but politicians should understand
that all governments will sooner or later loose and election.
"It is much better to lose and election having tried
to do something big, having tried to make major reforms. What
is needed in Europe is an understanding that we will have
a crisis because of declining competitiveness and demographic
changes if we do not take action now."
Esko Aho
Esko Aho was Prime Minister of Finland from 1991 to 1995
at the head of a right-of-centre conservative administration.
His government faced deep economic recession in the early
1990s and its harsh cut and save policies allied to deeply
unpopular plans to cut unemployment rates saw it roundly defeated
at the 1995 election. Esko Aho failed to win election as the
country's president in 2000 and retried from active politics.
He now heads Sitra, the Finnish National Fund for Research
and Development.
|