How to get US-EU collaboration going in R&D

Science Business (Beltrametti, V.P., Xerox Research Centre Europe) - Billions of dollars and euros are to be invested in research and development to achieve the similar goals set out in these respective packages. Yet there is hardly any effort to coordinate this work. Coordination could at best lead to great synergies and groundbreaking results – and at worst – avoid duplication. The same holds for the annual US federal government and EU R&D budgets, which represent 2 to 3 per cent of GDP, but which have very seldom involved any joint effort, even when they shared similar objectives.

When you analyse past – failed – attempts at coordination, particularly in the 1990s when the EU and the US National Science Foundation assigned funding for joint R&D projects, common issues emerge. The main problems in conducting these projects were that the financing bodies had different evaluation standards, and they each wanted total ownership of the results. The desire to avoid getting into sticky intellectual property disputes thus precluded any real kind of collaboration. Many projects never saw the light of day, while the results of those that did go ahead were so disappointing, for both researchers and funding agencies, that all parties were generally discouraged from renewing the experience.

If common sense tells us this is something worth doing, what kind of advice can we give to decision-makers to ensure this gets on the international relations agenda? As a start the following might help:

1. Identify what we have in common. If you consider that almost two thirds of US R&D investments outside the US are in Europe and vice versa, there is definitely a substantial mutual interest.
2. Identify differences. Two examples are funding and education. State funding of R&D in the EU member states is anything from 15 to 20 per cent higher than in the US, with far less spending on defence. Researchers in the US tend to have a broader set of skills, and more business acumen, while Europe excels in specific scientific fields such as mathematics and systems engineering. 
3. Don’t replicate what works in one place without fully understanding the context. Small and medium sized businesses grow at a much faster rate in the US, but it’s difficult to match that in Europe. The US national market is larger than any single European country. It’s also simpler and less expensive for US companies to become international as long as English remains the language of business. 
4. If it’s likely to work, make it more systemic. France is having recognised success with its ‘Competitive Clusters’, which bring together some 700 public and private research organisations in specific geographic areas with a high concentration of skills. The most successful ones have attracted world class expertise and created easy entry points to their particular areas of expertise. The European Union is now encouraging the development of similar clusters across the member states.
5. Encourage people to do what is in their best interests. We may not all speak the same language, but even the fiercest of competitors will come together and find a solution if they want it badly enough. Take the example of Europe’s ARTEMIS technology platform for embedded intelligence and systems. The partners need a broad platform but couldn’t afford to do it all themselves. In the project the work was divided up, with each contributing company developing the part of the platform that was closest to their business.
6. Diversify. Get higher returns by applying existing knowledge and expertise to completely different areas. The classic example here is the invention of magnetrons for defence radars leading to the creation of microwave ovens. A current example, which is closer to home for Xerox, is applying expertise in manipulating toner particles to the filtering of wastewater. 
7. Jump start a couple of high profile, high impact projects that have a good chance of success. Role models are great motivators. Let’s not forget the EU has worked hard at learning and teaching very diverse member states to work together. The Treaty of Lisbon signed by 27 states is a shining example. This experience will be invaluable in helping both sides move forward. 
8. Most of all, a push to encourage US/EU cooperation in R&D will require strong and persistent leaders capable of driving through further reform. Defining exactly how to tackle this issue needs to be begin now. Once that’s been done, the argument speaks for itself. Economic growth will be based on technology and innovation. We’re not asking the taxpayer to give more, but trying to spend what we have more wisely. That’s something on most people’s minds these days and it’s not likely to go away for quite some time to come.