The structures and instruments of science policy

This paper considers the structures and instruments of Spanish science policy. It contains seven sections, in which many suggestions for improvements are presented. Nineteen of these suggestions are formulated as proposals. The high figures involved in the public funding of research are discussed in the first section. The proposals are:

• Maintain existing commitments and increase the central government’s R+D budget by 25%. Moderate use of Chapter 8.
  
• Bring about comprehensive agreements between the different political forces to make science policy more stable.
  
• Make (triennial) ex-post evaluations of public R+D efforts.

Project policy is analysed in the second section. This is one of the basic instruments for government action in the research sector. The proposals are:

• Increase project funds by a minimum of 25% per year over the next four years.
  
• Substantial improvements to project policy should be made by: increasing the rigour of ex-ante and ex-post evaluations, increasing the stability and publicity of calls for proposals, linking funding to the size and quality of groups, increasing overheads, increasing the flexibility of fund management by groups, encouraging interdisciplinarity, promoting European and International coordination.
  
• New kinds of more structural programmes should be created: strategic funding for consolidated groups, for centres and networks of (real) excellence, and for highly demanding doctoral programmes.
  
• Create a special programme for updating research infrastructures.
  
• Promote specific programmes that combine research with business innovation.

The third section looks at the public institutions that undertake research, including: CSIC, hospitals, and universities.
The proposals are:

• CSIC should be reformed to increase its scientific strength and its relationship with other agents in the Spanish science and technology system (particularly universities). The administration of CSIC’s central structures has to be streamlined. In addition, its authority and management capacity should be significantly decentralised, giving more responsibility to centres and institutes, which should have their own legal status, boards, strategic plans, and clearly defined, strong scientific directions. Such centres and institutes should also be subject to periodic assessments by external scientific committees. CSIC researchers (of any nationality) should be offered indefinite employment contracts.
  
• Encourage research, and in particular clinical research, in the national health system’s large university hospitals. A scientific career in hospitals should be defined and established. Funding programmes for clinical research should be developed and philanthropy encouraged. Thematic research institutes should be created, and research institutes connected to the pharmaceutical industry. The role of the university should be increased, especially in postgraduate- and doctoral-level education.
  
• Regarding research in a university context: teaching and research should be combined more efficiently, organisational structures should be made more flexible, overheads increased, and attention should be paid to the characteristics of consultancy activities and issues related to intellectual property.
  
• Aspects of funding for science parks should be considered.

In the fourth section, we propose giving impetus to policies for special programmes and largescale facilities. The proposals are:

• A long-term policy of special programmes on scientific and technological subjects should be defined and developed. The subjects should be of strategic importance and have expert management.
  
• There should be a budget heading for the general programme of large-scale facilities.
  
• The Comité de Grandes Instalaciones (Large- Scale Facilities Committee) should be revitalised and strengthened.

The fifth section superficially analyses some of the important topics related to coordinating the central government’s R+D policies with those of the regional governments.

The sixth section looks at National Plans and topics related to the organisation of the State’s central government with respect to science policy. The proposals are:

• Consider attaching the CICYT to the President’s office. At the same time, a vice-presidency occupied by the Minister of Education and Science (i.e. the ministry that has the predominant responsibility for research) could be introduced.
  
• The creation of a Ministry of Science, Technology, and Universities should be attempted in the medium-term.
  
• An advisory parliamentary office for Science and Technology could be created.

Finally, the seventh section proposes the immediate creation of a Research Funding and Evaluation Agency (or Committee). The aim of this is to avoid hampering the management of science policy and to follow international models.
More specifically, the proposal is:

• Develop an agency (or committee) for evaluating and funding research as soon as possible. This agency would be dependent on the Ministry of Education and Science and include: the Agencia Nacional de Evaluación y Prospectiva National, ANEP (Evaluation and Long-Range Planning Agency), the Comisión Nacional Evaluadora de la Actividad Investigadora, CNEAI (National Committee for the Evaluation of Research Activities), the Fundación Española para la Ciencia y la Tecnología, FECYT (Spanish Foundation for Science and Technology). It would also assume responsibility for all the National Plan’s project and human resources policies that are currently directly managed by the Ministry of Education and Science. In addition. it would be responsible for overseeing any new initiatives in these fields.

Papers:

     The structures and instruments of science policy

     Human resources in research

     Science and the company: towards a dynamic ecosystem for innovation in Spain

     Spain in Europe

     Science and society

Committee:

     Committee